Unpublished Straits Times letter by Chan Tse Chueen
I am sorry to hear of the death threats and hostility that Aware’s new exco members have faced. The threat of violence cannot be justified.
From the recent reports on the views of Aware’s new executive committee members – and their mentor, lawyer Thio Su Mien – it is clear the group’s new leaders worry that it has become a “single-objective organisation” preoccupied with promoting homosexuality. And it is clear that they’ve got it wrong.
Aware has, as one of its long-time member Chew I-Jin pointed out, recently worked on issues such as sexual harassment in the workplace and the burden on singles in an ageing society. How does that make Aware a single-objective organisation?
Did Aware, as its new leaders claim, promote homosexuality? Well, it does not condemn homosexuality, as Dr Thio, who sought out and encouraged some of these women who are now exco members to challenge Aware’s “pro-homosexuality agenda”, would have liked. In Aware’s sexuality programme for schools, she found out, homosexuality is a neutral term, not a negative one.
What Aware’s new leaders object to is a natural consequence of Aware’s professed and cherished inclusiveness. They seem to be upset that it promotes gender equality for all, regardless of race, religion or sexuality. [Please keep emphasis.] If they do not agree with what Aware stands for, why did they join Aware? I applaud their willingness to serve. But would their energies not be better used in an organisation that truly reflects their values?
Comments are closed.