-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Aware Ambushed & they had no clue
- Thread starter scroobal
- Start date
your question is normal due to the huge amount of homoprobia in society.
gays (and lesbians etc) are asking for the same rights as another human being. in our country, a person having sex with another person of the same gender is deemed to have committed a crime. this is crap and this law should be repealed.
as for whether gays should get married and adopt children, this is another issue for further debate.
Last edited:
So you're children will grow up shit stabbing and tofu rubbing and that will make you happy, you cunt!?
Infraction for me? mudskipper or clone?
Last edited:
To shOUTloud:
Thanks for posting the two pieces.
Thanks for posting the two pieces.
Last edited:
So you're children will grow up shit stabbing and tofu rubbing and that will make you happy, you cunt!?
Infraction for me? mudskipper or clone?
looks like you have learned to be a bit more civil. I will ignore the word "cunt" for this reply. I have no problems with my children being gay if they are eventually happy.
this is true wisdom and compassion. not forcing people to our own pre-conceived set of beliefs but letting people be happy on their terms as long as they do not harm others.
Go fuck yourself cunt! How civil is that? Never try to be condescending with me chao chee bai! dun, neber, who is the chee bai kiah who use those words? Fuck you in the ass pussy fuck! :oIo:
And cheers to your children going the shit stabbing and tofu rubbing way! How to fuck you can have children going the wrong hole way!:oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo:
I am really keen to see AWARE reborn with new vigour. Actually I am aware that PAP had a bit of difficulty restraining the group in the past. So much so they had to read to them the riot act at about the same time as Catholic church group (before they arrested them).
As to the recapture of AWARE, do be mindful that church congregation tend to behave like sheep and they will get the numbers and its ready numbers. Might want to consider setting up an alternative group and start the move now. There are enough recgonised and acceptable personalities associated with the previous of AWARE to bring the spotlight on the new group if you one is set up.
Another point of view from Mathia Lee who was there at the AGM.
http://mathialee.wordpress.com/
Having being at the AGM, i’m actually wondering, what is ST’s purpose in angle-ing the story that way.
and more importantly, since ST is the mouthpiece of the govt
what is the govt trying to contain?
what is the govt trying to tell the public about AWARE?
what is the impact of this report on ppl who are getting their info by simply reading that report?
we made a big impact last year with the sexual harrassment case you know?
It seems from the report that this group is trying to take over
without having made any contributions
and internet chatter says this group is anti-gay as well….
If i didn’t know how the ST is a propaganda tool, i would put it down to bad journalism
I know that from time-to-time, listening to the old members, we’ve heard war stories about the govt interfering in AWARE.
I just took a look at our achievements:
http://www.aware.org.sg/?page_id=19
It seems to me that all our achievements have to do only either a very small segment of society eg. Female medical students, or else a powerless/disenfranchised group with little political impact eg citizen ship for female’s children when the male is a foreigner. And that too is in line with our population policy. Stuff like men and women being “heads of households” are very philosophical, little political impact.
The only exception is probably “ 2005 equalisation of benefits in the current medical scheme in the Civil Service for male and female officers”. I wasn’t that politically conscious then , so I don’t really know, but I’m curious to know what was the govt response during then. But that “problem” is not really something people were shocked by —- we all knew about the unequal benefits for the longest time already!!!! I believe we also did something to raise the awareness of how CPF is biased against women in their old age. That’s something to look at too.
Over the last couple of years, the last Exco, headed by Constance Singam, JooHymn, they’ve made a conscious, intended effort to mainstream the issues we deal with.
That means, instead of just limiting issues to HIV positive women, or domestically abused women, or poor body image, they’re talking about Work-Life Balance. And the extremely high impact Sexual Harrassment at the workplace. So suddenly, its not a group of helpless women who have been marginalised. The issues are about every woman. We’re continuing to go down that road — there was that report about Sexual Harrassment on public transport systems being common. And from what I’ve heard, the Sexual Harrassment issue has gained ears all the way up in the govt echelons. Stuff like that galvanises mass support — something which can be seen as a threat to political power. We could see the rise of a women’s voting bloc which has been so conspicuously absent in Singapore, as opposed to many other 1st world nations.
Issues like this also motivate more people to join AWARE. When issues affect you, when you see a group that goes beyond the “charity for helpless” model, and actually does something effectively for the mainstream, people start to feel like this is an effective platform where they too, can DO something about things. I would expect that our membership increases greatly. And as with most NGOs, it will be made up of the “victims”. This time, the “victims” are not the marginalised women. They are the powerful women who have work-life balance issues, they are the women who went through the corporate world dealing with sexual harassment. These are women with achievements, and they see another platform where they can contribute. These are women, who have succeeded in life, because their work-style is , ‘I’m coming into the room, don’t waste my time, let’s get down to work, I’ve been an effective leader outside, and I know how we should do things here to make it better, so put me on Exco’
While what the report said was true, about the questions asked on religion and homosexuality, I think the report focused on this and nothing else. I felt it was part of a normal and healthy debate, that you hardly find with the general apathetic Singaporean population, but was very expected with a group of very enthusiastic , powerful women, who were far from apathetic, who joined Aware because they wanted to do something.
Why do I think religion became an issue? I think it just goes with the general trend of the changing microculture that’s evolving over the last few years. Religion vs secularism is becoming increasing loud and polarised in general, and globally. When you have an organisation dealing with sexuality, with women’s rights, with homosexuality (to a certain extent, though we’ve never wanted to be flag bearers in this respect), you can expect religion to be brought up.
Why was homosexuality brought up? Look at it in the context of other issues that were also brought up equally loudly, : Time Management and commitment, experience, feminist thought, continuity vs innovation, past achievements, ……. Homosexuality is just another point that would naturally come up in a feminist organisation! I realise there seems to be some suggestion of them being anti-gay.
Here’s my take.
When AWARE deals with issues of marginalised women, you tend to attract all sorts of marginalised women into the organisation, and homosexual-rights-crusaders are a major group. These people are still there, and they want to make sure AWARE still has non-discriminatory policies.
Then when AWARE mainstreams, you attract mainstream women, and strong mainstream women too, who are of a certain level of age and achievement. Such women tend to see feminism as the movement to “protect and fight” for the rights of women in general, in the mainstream, against the male chauvinists. In general, Singaporean mainstream women also tend to be conservative, safe and pro-family values ( where do you think work-life-balance, and anti-sexual-harrassment comes from??? ). Am I surprised that they have conservative views where homosexuality is concerned? Absolutely not. Will this be good for AWARE/ Singapore? I don’t know. Will there be a drive AGAINST homosexuality? I really don’t know, but I suspect they are busy people and would rather invest their time achieving their pet goals instead of being out to get a certain group in society. Remember, they brought up their views in response to questions, and a lot of other background material was the ST-Journalist’s own research and portrayal. But more importantly , was there a concerted anti-gay conspiracy ? I think you need to have a very good imagination, and be psychotically paranoid to believe that.
Was there a conspiracy?
Here’s why I am quite certain there isn’t.
Most people only knew a couple of candidates out of the many that stood for election
We had a round of election speeches, followed by the elections. By the time voting was done, people could hardly remember who was who, who said what, and we needed to introduce the candidates separately before voting again! I suppose that if it’s a conspiracy, people would at least KNOW most of the candidates ? Could the 100 voters there be faking ignorance to orchestrate the conspiracy? Possible, but how believable !??!?! In Singapore, where 100 middle aged women gather, and they all had discussions AND acting lessons before hand???? It was a very democratic, transparent process. Votes were by “raise of hands” rather than secret ballots, meaning that you couldn’t even claim rigged vote counting!
Also, the people who were voted in were GENUINELY and VERY SIGNIFICANTLY better than some of those who were NOT voted in. I was one of the candidates who was NOT voted in, and I will be the first to admit this fact. As for some of the “old guard” who were not voted in, I would say that the margins were SO close that I hardly think there was a conspiracy. When you have 100 women voting openly, assuming they were not OSCAR winning actresses, and the chosen person won by a 60-40 margin, I don’t see that as a conspiracy. It could have swung both ways, and would be very hard to control.
One last issue I want to bring up, again on why I think there might be a reason to contain AWARE’s influence and support base. Human trafficking, migrant worker abuses, are becoming a HUGE issue in Singapore, one that the State does not openly admit to. I’m not going to detail it here, but you would be able to find much info just by googling, or following some of the other websites. TOC did a brilliant coverage last year.
AWARE writes the CEDAW shadow report to be submitted to the UN. Prostitution and human trafficking is a big issue, and the info we are gathering could be unsettling. I see that as a great motivation for containment.
So in conclusion, I think we must think about WHY the ST report was written, rather than focusing on why what happened, happened.
http://mathialee.wordpress.com/
Having being at the AGM, i’m actually wondering, what is ST’s purpose in angle-ing the story that way.
and more importantly, since ST is the mouthpiece of the govt
what is the govt trying to contain?
what is the govt trying to tell the public about AWARE?
what is the impact of this report on ppl who are getting their info by simply reading that report?
we made a big impact last year with the sexual harrassment case you know?
It seems from the report that this group is trying to take over
without having made any contributions
and internet chatter says this group is anti-gay as well….
If i didn’t know how the ST is a propaganda tool, i would put it down to bad journalism
I know that from time-to-time, listening to the old members, we’ve heard war stories about the govt interfering in AWARE.
I just took a look at our achievements:
http://www.aware.org.sg/?page_id=19
It seems to me that all our achievements have to do only either a very small segment of society eg. Female medical students, or else a powerless/disenfranchised group with little political impact eg citizen ship for female’s children when the male is a foreigner. And that too is in line with our population policy. Stuff like men and women being “heads of households” are very philosophical, little political impact.
The only exception is probably “ 2005 equalisation of benefits in the current medical scheme in the Civil Service for male and female officers”. I wasn’t that politically conscious then , so I don’t really know, but I’m curious to know what was the govt response during then. But that “problem” is not really something people were shocked by —- we all knew about the unequal benefits for the longest time already!!!! I believe we also did something to raise the awareness of how CPF is biased against women in their old age. That’s something to look at too.
Over the last couple of years, the last Exco, headed by Constance Singam, JooHymn, they’ve made a conscious, intended effort to mainstream the issues we deal with.
That means, instead of just limiting issues to HIV positive women, or domestically abused women, or poor body image, they’re talking about Work-Life Balance. And the extremely high impact Sexual Harrassment at the workplace. So suddenly, its not a group of helpless women who have been marginalised. The issues are about every woman. We’re continuing to go down that road — there was that report about Sexual Harrassment on public transport systems being common. And from what I’ve heard, the Sexual Harrassment issue has gained ears all the way up in the govt echelons. Stuff like that galvanises mass support — something which can be seen as a threat to political power. We could see the rise of a women’s voting bloc which has been so conspicuously absent in Singapore, as opposed to many other 1st world nations.
Issues like this also motivate more people to join AWARE. When issues affect you, when you see a group that goes beyond the “charity for helpless” model, and actually does something effectively for the mainstream, people start to feel like this is an effective platform where they too, can DO something about things. I would expect that our membership increases greatly. And as with most NGOs, it will be made up of the “victims”. This time, the “victims” are not the marginalised women. They are the powerful women who have work-life balance issues, they are the women who went through the corporate world dealing with sexual harassment. These are women with achievements, and they see another platform where they can contribute. These are women, who have succeeded in life, because their work-style is , ‘I’m coming into the room, don’t waste my time, let’s get down to work, I’ve been an effective leader outside, and I know how we should do things here to make it better, so put me on Exco’
While what the report said was true, about the questions asked on religion and homosexuality, I think the report focused on this and nothing else. I felt it was part of a normal and healthy debate, that you hardly find with the general apathetic Singaporean population, but was very expected with a group of very enthusiastic , powerful women, who were far from apathetic, who joined Aware because they wanted to do something.
Why do I think religion became an issue? I think it just goes with the general trend of the changing microculture that’s evolving over the last few years. Religion vs secularism is becoming increasing loud and polarised in general, and globally. When you have an organisation dealing with sexuality, with women’s rights, with homosexuality (to a certain extent, though we’ve never wanted to be flag bearers in this respect), you can expect religion to be brought up.
Why was homosexuality brought up? Look at it in the context of other issues that were also brought up equally loudly, : Time Management and commitment, experience, feminist thought, continuity vs innovation, past achievements, ……. Homosexuality is just another point that would naturally come up in a feminist organisation! I realise there seems to be some suggestion of them being anti-gay.
Here’s my take.
When AWARE deals with issues of marginalised women, you tend to attract all sorts of marginalised women into the organisation, and homosexual-rights-crusaders are a major group. These people are still there, and they want to make sure AWARE still has non-discriminatory policies.
Then when AWARE mainstreams, you attract mainstream women, and strong mainstream women too, who are of a certain level of age and achievement. Such women tend to see feminism as the movement to “protect and fight” for the rights of women in general, in the mainstream, against the male chauvinists. In general, Singaporean mainstream women also tend to be conservative, safe and pro-family values ( where do you think work-life-balance, and anti-sexual-harrassment comes from??? ). Am I surprised that they have conservative views where homosexuality is concerned? Absolutely not. Will this be good for AWARE/ Singapore? I don’t know. Will there be a drive AGAINST homosexuality? I really don’t know, but I suspect they are busy people and would rather invest their time achieving their pet goals instead of being out to get a certain group in society. Remember, they brought up their views in response to questions, and a lot of other background material was the ST-Journalist’s own research and portrayal. But more importantly , was there a concerted anti-gay conspiracy ? I think you need to have a very good imagination, and be psychotically paranoid to believe that.
Was there a conspiracy?
Here’s why I am quite certain there isn’t.
Most people only knew a couple of candidates out of the many that stood for election
We had a round of election speeches, followed by the elections. By the time voting was done, people could hardly remember who was who, who said what, and we needed to introduce the candidates separately before voting again! I suppose that if it’s a conspiracy, people would at least KNOW most of the candidates ? Could the 100 voters there be faking ignorance to orchestrate the conspiracy? Possible, but how believable !??!?! In Singapore, where 100 middle aged women gather, and they all had discussions AND acting lessons before hand???? It was a very democratic, transparent process. Votes were by “raise of hands” rather than secret ballots, meaning that you couldn’t even claim rigged vote counting!
Also, the people who were voted in were GENUINELY and VERY SIGNIFICANTLY better than some of those who were NOT voted in. I was one of the candidates who was NOT voted in, and I will be the first to admit this fact. As for some of the “old guard” who were not voted in, I would say that the margins were SO close that I hardly think there was a conspiracy. When you have 100 women voting openly, assuming they were not OSCAR winning actresses, and the chosen person won by a 60-40 margin, I don’t see that as a conspiracy. It could have swung both ways, and would be very hard to control.
One last issue I want to bring up, again on why I think there might be a reason to contain AWARE’s influence and support base. Human trafficking, migrant worker abuses, are becoming a HUGE issue in Singapore, one that the State does not openly admit to. I’m not going to detail it here, but you would be able to find much info just by googling, or following some of the other websites. TOC did a brilliant coverage last year.
AWARE writes the CEDAW shadow report to be submitted to the UN. Prostitution and human trafficking is a big issue, and the info we are gathering could be unsettling. I see that as a great motivation for containment.
So in conclusion, I think we must think about WHY the ST report was written, rather than focusing on why what happened, happened.
Yes, apparently a lot of the new people at the AGM (except for their leaders) looked and behaved like zombies. They did this to stop AWARE from doing something. AWARE was just about to make some changes to its constitution. I reckon that now they have achieved that, they will move very, very slowly. Few other things will be changed immediately so that they can continue to look as if they are the old AWARE (although change will come insidiously and creep into the nature of their activities/projects, and the way services are provided to battered and troubled women--dispensed no doubt with advice to return to their husbands and families). This means that any new association the old guard wants to set up will have to hobble along with a severe handicap, not being able to rely immediately on the legitimacy it once had.
I beg to differ on this point. I think the women behind AWARE all these years are a fomidable lot. The moment a few of them get together, the focus will shift as they do have street cred of some sort. The trick is not to lose their aura with time.
Hate to tell you this but this lady is as blur as they come. She is all over ehe place but can't see the meat between the sandwich. She is with Singapore Enquirer / Wayangparty / Ng Ejay mob.
In life you need to add up the markers before you get the final sum no matter small the issue is. This one can't add to save her life. You should see what IPS think of this lot.
The fact that Ms Mathia Lee does not think that there was a conspiracy to usurp power suggests one of more of the following:
1) She is completely clueless
2) She is actually a Christian fundamentalist herself who is happy that her likes have gained control of AWARE
3) She thinks that the red shirt protesters in Thailand are a spontaneous group of protesters that has nothing to do with Thaksin.
Fine but she does deserve her shout as well. I am curious as to how she is linked with wayangparty crowd.
For the first in years, I am waiting for the ST to post followup reports to find out more about the moves and countermoves from the gangs involved.
As much as I think that the Toa Payoh Brothel has no soul and guts and basically mercenaries, they managed to line the ducks in one row and the probability of those who wrote to the forum along the same vein appearing in one room at one time and on the same occasion to decide on the same set of action is mind boggling to consider it a fluke.
I was asked about this lady sometime ago and in turn asked around. Got my my answers fast and real fast. The word "clueless" came out on top. The other word was "Fashionista" and I foolishly thought that she was into clothes and grooming. I was corrected - more into socio-political fads and trends. If liberals were in power, she will be with the ultra nationalist.
How shallow can she get, when she thought that those who signed up in Feb and March voted after hearing speeches of the respective candidates.
Interestingly the red and yellow shirts have become one way to determine who is clued in about current affairs and politics.
Scroobal, what do you think of Balji's take?
Monday, April 13, 2009
Ladies, haveyou forgotten your narrative?
Let there be a clash of ideas and let Aware members decide — that’s the kind ofmaturity Singapore needs
P N Balji
THE ladies at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) do not seem to get it.
.
Instead of doing some soul-searching on how the old guard at the women’s group got blindsided, out-foxed and out-numbered by a group of newbies at its annual general meeting three weeks ago, they are behaving like a group of sore losers.
.
Worse still, they are saying things which make you wonder what happened to their often-stated views, articulated both publicly and privately, championing the need for choices in a pluralistic society.
.
Two responses to the election swoop that saw nine of the 12 executive committee seats going to fresh faces which disappoint:
.
The insurgents should have been part of the system, working within it and waiting for their time to be anointed as a new generation of leaders. Sounds very familiar.
.
If you want things done differently, don’t upset the apple cart but go and form your own group. Again, very familiar.
.
Both reactions are flawed.
.
Aware has come a long way. In the last 24 years, it has fought suspicions in some places about its beliefs and motives, struggled with the lack of resources and played catch-up with the need to find fresh talent at the top.
.
What is there to say that a new group from without won’t be able to break new ground by professionalising the outfit even more?
.
And if they do not, there is the next annual general meeting to expose their shortfalls and make a push for change. Isn’t that what elections are all about?
.
Yes, there was an element of stealth in how the Group of Nine planned their leadership swoop on March 28. There was a sudden surge in the number of members in the last three months, there was meticulous planning to take everyone by surprise and there was a surgical strike on that eventful day.
.
All these show that these women are not a motley group but a well-organised and well-orchestrated group who mean business.
.
The one missing piece of information is their real agenda. Are their beliefs and motives quite different from those of the old guard? If so, what are they?
.
Heavy hints are already being dropped in the media and in cyberspace about the religious inclinations and anti-gay stand of some of the members of the new group.
.
If that is what is upsetting the old team, then take them on, show why they are no good for the future of the women’s movement in Singapore.
.
Let there be a clash of ideas and let the members decide which set they want.
.
If it is a case of being upset at the way leadership was seized from right under their noses, constitutionally mind you, then they should be magnanimous in defeat, lick their wounds and prepare to fight another day. Whether in politics or activism, it is that kind of maturity that Singapore needs.
.
.
A veteran journalist, P N Balji is now thedirector of the Asia Journalism Fellowship,a joint initiative by the Temasek Foundation and the Nanyang Technological University.
Let there be a clash of ideas and let Aware members decide — that’s the kind ofmaturity Singapore needs
Monday, April 13, 2009
Ladies, haveyou forgotten your narrative?
Let there be a clash of ideas and let Aware members decide — that’s the kind ofmaturity Singapore needs
P N Balji
THE ladies at the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) do not seem to get it.
.
Instead of doing some soul-searching on how the old guard at the women’s group got blindsided, out-foxed and out-numbered by a group of newbies at its annual general meeting three weeks ago, they are behaving like a group of sore losers.
.
Worse still, they are saying things which make you wonder what happened to their often-stated views, articulated both publicly and privately, championing the need for choices in a pluralistic society.
.
Two responses to the election swoop that saw nine of the 12 executive committee seats going to fresh faces which disappoint:
.
The insurgents should have been part of the system, working within it and waiting for their time to be anointed as a new generation of leaders. Sounds very familiar.
.
If you want things done differently, don’t upset the apple cart but go and form your own group. Again, very familiar.
.
Both reactions are flawed.
.
Aware has come a long way. In the last 24 years, it has fought suspicions in some places about its beliefs and motives, struggled with the lack of resources and played catch-up with the need to find fresh talent at the top.
.
What is there to say that a new group from without won’t be able to break new ground by professionalising the outfit even more?
.
And if they do not, there is the next annual general meeting to expose their shortfalls and make a push for change. Isn’t that what elections are all about?
.
Yes, there was an element of stealth in how the Group of Nine planned their leadership swoop on March 28. There was a sudden surge in the number of members in the last three months, there was meticulous planning to take everyone by surprise and there was a surgical strike on that eventful day.
.
All these show that these women are not a motley group but a well-organised and well-orchestrated group who mean business.
.
The one missing piece of information is their real agenda. Are their beliefs and motives quite different from those of the old guard? If so, what are they?
.
Heavy hints are already being dropped in the media and in cyberspace about the religious inclinations and anti-gay stand of some of the members of the new group.
.
If that is what is upsetting the old team, then take them on, show why they are no good for the future of the women’s movement in Singapore.
.
Let there be a clash of ideas and let the members decide which set they want.
.
If it is a case of being upset at the way leadership was seized from right under their noses, constitutionally mind you, then they should be magnanimous in defeat, lick their wounds and prepare to fight another day. Whether in politics or activism, it is that kind of maturity that Singapore needs.
.
.
A veteran journalist, P N Balji is now thedirector of the Asia Journalism Fellowship,a joint initiative by the Temasek Foundation and the Nanyang Technological University.
Let there be a clash of ideas and let Aware members decide — that’s the kind ofmaturity Singapore needs
Scroobal, what do you think of Balji's take?
Looks like he is being reading this forum. He is right. Time to fight and fight strong.
I now more inclined to get the old guards to start a new outfit and a brand new constitution with the same mission that covers eventualities like overnight guest taking over the household.
As I told Belle, the personalities are there to assure that its AWARE V2 and let the invited guests remain in the shell they took over. It will safe at least a year and avoid the unnecessary confrontation that will be expected in a retake.
After all, there is no castle or physical assets. A key plank in any attack is not to bring the spotlight over the enemy.
ps. Even Balji ( a male who was not present ) seemed to know the agenda while Mathia is still looking for it.
According to the grapevine, they noticed and had engaged them but assumed it was word of mouth in in terms of new interest. Some of them felt that had been deceived after chatting with them and the final outcome. Even during the AGM, nothing in the speeches alluded to anything as the numbers were stacked.
According to the grapevine from other side, bickering has started as some felt that deceit was not the way. Some had thought that ti was going to be an AGM pitting one camp over the other over ideals but that was not the case as the sppeeches were misleading. The sheep are having second thoughts.
The fault nevertheless lies with AWARE for not having a constitution that allowed office bearers to have reasonable period of history.
Similar threads
