There is a lot of press coverage from Straits Times today. The most interest of all, is that
“it appears that some of the newcomers in its leadership are familiar faces at the Anglican Church of Our Saviour at Margaret Drive.”
Based on the Strait TImes article, that means, the following are all attending Anglican Church of Our Saviour.
- Josie Lau (President) and husband Alan Chin
- Charlotte Wong (Vice-president)
- Irene Yee (Committee member)
- Jenica Chua (Honorary secretary)
- Maureen Ong (Honorary treasurer)
- Sally Ang (Assistant honorary secretary)
That is 6 posts out of the 11 posts (1 less from original line-up of 12, as committee member Josie Lau is now the President), where all the 5 decision posts – President, Vice-president, Honorary secretary, Honorary treasurer and Assistant honorary secretary are taken by the same clique.
Some attend the same church
Straits Times, April 18, 2009 Saturday
EVEN as the Aware saga continues to unfold, it appears that some of the newcomers in its leadership are familiar faces at the Anglican Church Of Our Saviour at Margaret Drive.
Aside from new Aware president Josie Lau and her husband Alan Chin, the others are believed to be Ms Charlotte Wong, Ms Irene Yee, Ms Jenica Chua, Ms Maureen Ong and Ms Sally Ang.
So far, the new Aware leaders have refused to answer questions about whether they knew each other before sweeping the elections three weeks ago.
According to a long-time friend, Dr Chin is related to former law dean Dr Thio Su Mien and her daughter, Nominated Member of Parliament Professor Thio Li-Ann.
When contacted, the NMP declined to answer any questions. Dr Chin did not respond to questions e-mailed to him.
But checks yesterday showed that Dr Thio Su Mien and her husband, Mr Thio Gim Hock, the chief executive officer of property investor Overseas Union Enterprise, attend the church and also hold regular faith-healing sessions at their home.
Senior pastor Derek Hong was not answering any questions about his church members or Aware yesterday.
Asked if any of the new Aware exco members attended his church, he replied: ‘No comment.’
Housed in a renovated former cinema near Commonwealth, the church has a congregation of about 4,000.
It takes a strong stand against homosexuality and states so on its website.
‘Homosexual practice is contrary to God’s Word. So we stand against that and the active and aggressive promotion of such behaviour,’ it states.
It believes homosexuals can change, and has a programme to counsel and help those who want to give up ‘homosexual thoughts, tendencies and practices’.
TAN DAWN WEI
Article obtained from Straits Times on 18 Apr 2009
One thing for sure, it be super dumbass if taking over AWARE means providing them a channel to step into this anti-gay stance.
To Paddy:
How about taking over AWARE to prevent it from becoming the voice of equal (gay) rights?
To federick:
Oi, I didn’t realise AWARE is the voice of egual (gay) rights.
Isn’t it about women, only women and all women?
The women go to the same church?S0 WHAT? They might also be going to the same temple if was a “cool place.” Haven’t you heard,Birds of a feather flock together or maybe it’s a “cool” place to go to.
I think they are strong women of charater, to stick on even with press and AWARE old guards gunning them down even before they started working.
I wonder why people would think that their church would have an interest in their group when it is common knowledge that churches continually form groups on their own initiative to help society at large at their own expense too.
Are they all gay at AWARE?
Wake up, people! Your comments show that you are not aware of the issues and what’s at stake. It’s not about gays, it’s not about elections. It’s about choice, it’s about different voices in our civic life and it’s about secularism in our society.
Do read this petition and educate yourselves ….
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/gender-equality-for-all.html
Save AWARE! Gender equality for all!
115 Signatures
Published by Gender Equality on Apr 22, 2009
Category: Gender Issues
Region: Singapore
Target: Singaporeans overseas
Web site: http://www.we-are-aware.sg/
[Sign Petition]
Background (Preamble):
The Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) has been taken over by a group of people whose values are opposed to what AWARE stands for. This group of newcomers (who have joined AWARE for only 5 months) and have not volunteered a single hour of work are linked to fundamentalist churches.
The Save AWARE site at http://www.we-are-aware.sg provides full details of this take-over. There are also many media reports and blogs about this. (See, for example, http://singaporedaily.net/2009/04/22/daily-sg-22-apr-2009/ and http://www.glass-castle.org.)
Petition:
As Singaporeans overseas we are very concerned about the take-over of the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) on 28 March 2009 by a group of people, whose values are opposed to what AWARE stands for. For nearly 25 years, AWARE has worked to advance gender equality for all women in Singapore, regardless of race, religion, or sexuality. Through its many contributions, AWARE has significantly enhanced women’s capacity to make informed choices over their bodies and their lives.
We support the Save AWARE Campaign (http://www.we-are-aware.sg) on the following grounds:
1. Media reports indicate that the newcomers, now on AWARE’s new Executive Committee, are, at best, ignorant of AWARE’s mission and, at worst, ideologically opposed to this.
2. There are clear indications from media reports that the take-over was by a group with affiliations to known fundamentalist organisations – notably, Church of Our Saviour and Focus on the Family (as well as possibly Liberty League and Exodus International). As reported in the Straits Times (18 April 2009), six of the eleven current Ex-Co members attend the Church of Our Saviour, which has publicly stated its position on women’s role and status. In the document ‘God’s Order for the Family’, posted as a resource on the Church’s website , it is openly stated that ‘the wife is in subjection to her husband’ and ‘women [are] to continually deny themselves and yield the rule to men’. This document states: ‘feminist movements…are not according to God’s order’. Rather, ‘His will for a young women is to do four things: (1) marry, (2) bear children, (3) guide the house, (4) not be a reproach to her husband.’ It is highly unlikely, to say the least, that members of a church promoting such values would champion gender equality for all women in all spheres of life. Rather, it is more likely that this fundamentalist group would engage in an exercise of defining who qualifies as a ‘woman’ and who does not. If so, this would be diametrically opposed to AWARE’s inclusion of all women as having the right to gender equality, be they gay or straight, married or unmarried, mothers or not, employed or not, Christian or not.
3. Various blog writers have pointed out that this hostile take-over is a warning sign of fundamentalist ambitions that may extend far beyond AWARE. The question has been raised several times why fundamentalists have been motivated to take over a secular organisation like AWARE. Is it to ‘confuse others into believing that these agendas are supported by an organisation which is concerned with women’s best interests from a feminist and humanist point of view, rather than a Christian fundamentalist point of view’? (http://www.glass-castle.org) Is this the thin end of a wedge that may subsequently affect other secular civic organizations and perhaps even beyond?
4. The new Ex-Co has not communicated with the rank and file membership of AWARE, despite the public controversy that has broken out, leaving members to learn about AWARE from media reports. It has sacked all the current heads of the AWARE sub-committees, including the summary dismissal of Braema Mathi, Chairperson of AWARE’s CEDAW Committee. (CEDAW is the UN Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women.) It has refused to disclose specific plans, despite repeated questioning by journalists. The recently elected President, Claire Nazar, resigned after 11 days, because of what she described as the new Ex-Co’s ‘Stormtrooper tactics’ (The Straits Times, 19 April 2009). All these acts and omissions are symptomatic of the duplicity and disingenuousness that underlie this take-over by stealth.
5. This was confirmed in the recent letter to AWARE members written by the Immediate Past President, Constance Singam, who noted that ‘although the team [the new Ex-Co] had publicly said that they would honour Aware’s founders and build on the good work of past members, their private behaviour suggested otherwise.’ ‘In private meetings, the exco showed a complete lack of respect for me, ignoring my advice and keeping me out of an exco meeting when I had the right to be there, as stated in the Constitution,’ she wrote (The Straits Times 19 April 2009).
We, the undersigned, support the Save AWARE Campaign as a collective endeavour to reclaim AWARE as a vehicle to advance women’s rights to gender equality and individual choices.
We call on the fundamentalist group who have taken over to respect AWARE’s vision of ‘gender equality for all’ and its mission ‘to identify areas for improvement in gender equality, encourage positive change; and support women in realizing their highest potential.’ As reported by The Straits Times (10 April 2009), when this new group was asked at the recent Annual General Meeting if they believe in equality, ‘they kept repeating they were there to support women and to make sure they got ahead and got all the opportunities given to them.’ We call on this group to quit AWARE as soon as possible, if they cannot uphold its foundational vision and mission.
We call on all Singaporeans and permanent residents concerned with the continuing existence of a secular civil society in Singapore to support the Save AWARE Campaign.
(Note: Signatories should be Singaporean citizens and permanent residents, of any gender. Please provide your name as stated in your NRIC with your NRIC number and your current country of residence.)
Sign the petition
The Save AWARE! Gender equality for all! petition to Singaporeans overseas was written by Gender Equality and is hosted free of charge at GoPetition.
Please do not call anyone a FUNDAMENTALIST. Stay rational.
If the values of said church is as mentioned, then the definition of fundamentalism is not far off. Not that Wikipedia definition is the last word, but it does represent the venacular usage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism
@Tanu:
“I wonder why people would think that their church would have an interest in their group when it is common knowledge that churches continually form groups on their own initiative to help society at large at their own expense too.”
Your key word is “form”. Yes, they should form their own group if they feel strongly about this issue. Possibly a church-based group, but if not, they are free to register their own civil society organisation.
So, why usurp others’ hard-built group?
This AWARE saga is so interesting! Was taking a break from my studies when I read up on all this stuff. Fascinating.. Will keep a close eye on proceedings.. Hehe.. This drama gets better by the day!
Hmmm but the new EX-CO grp sounds really scary, from a bystander’s point of view.. Can’t believe that Theo Su Mien said “Are we going to have an entire generation of lesbians?” Lol, like wtfish. She went on to say that lesbians are borne out of broken or dysfunctional families.. In some cases maybe so, but generally I thought the idea was that homosexuality was a choice. People CHOOSE to be gay/lesbian. By saying such stuff, it just shows she really kinda out of touch. Anyway this organisation is supposed to champion women rights, right?? So who cares if they’re lesbian! If women are discriminated against as lesbians, isn’t it the job of AWARE to make sure that they aren’t discriminated against because of their homo-ness..
And the 6/11 people coming from the same church, it just sounds plain wrong la.. Objectively speaking.. Not because they’re Christian, not because they have a common objective in mind as key members of this committee.. The biggest problem is that their goals and objectives are not aligned with those of the organisation.. They are seriously gonna stir up some sh*t if they don’t come clean on what the hell they’re up to..
Oxford Dictionary
fun•da•men•tal•ism /fndmentlzm/ noun [U]
1 the practice of following very strictly the basic rules and teachings of any religion
2 (in Christianity) the belief that everything that is written in the Bible is completely true
Not fundamentalist???!! You be the judge. Email trail:
From: lynkl@xxxxxx
To: leonglh@xxxxxx, siowkee16@xxxxxx.sg, shari200@xxxxxx.sg., aikhoons@xxxxx.sg, siuyoong@xxxxx.com, sulilee8@xxxx.com, jesgbf@xxxxx.com, eschan@xxxxx.sg
Subject: Fw: Re Aware
Attachments AWARE_membership_mail-in_application_form.pdf McFarlane v. homosex therapy.htm selected articles (1).pdf
Dear beloved Sis In Christ,
Would like to ask you and your like-minded friends who are believers to join as members of AWARE to cast votes and be a change agent for the Lord in some of the recent issues happen in this organization that is not according to the Lord’s principles………..
Please pray for Lord’s wisdom to pass on this important message as it is confidential……
Thank you.
Lynn.
12/2/09
From: Mervyn xxx
Sent: Sat 4/18/2009 11:59 PM
To: xxxx Xian Jin; FOONG Tai Wei; Adora TAN Su Yan; Eugene TAN Jia Rong; ZHOU Siming
Subject: RE: AWARE – Your Action Needed
Acknowledged. We (Eugene and I) had quite a bit of talk on this issue over dinner today.
Right now we should pray for the COOS members who are being put through scrutiny and invasion of their private lives by the media. Pray that God’s Word will prevail over the values of the world. Homosexuality isn’t God’s design and we pray that those who stand up against it and are discriminated will be delivered.
Praise God for COOS’ stand and He who aids us as we stand firmly upon His Word.
- Merv
Lotsa lessons to learn about how we Christians engage the world and secularism.
From what was said by the new Exco, none of them knew one another before the AGM despite coming from the same church.
Does not take an Einstein mind to know that these Xtians are lying. Whatever happens to the obeyance of the “Thou shall not lie” commandment?
If they can even lie about their friendship, I wonder what other sinister objectives they will push through.
I suggest someone from the media call their Senior Pastor and asked him how long has these liars been in his church. WTF is this church teaching?
To Federika: I understand that men can become associate members. Also there has been a proposal (2 times) to allow men, foreign women and teenagers to have voting rights in AWARE. Right?
To all: Do you really believe what is printed in the media? Has anyone questioned the motives and integrity of the news reporters?
@LC:
According to a copy of the constitutional along with the 24th AGM min, which is being mailed to each of the AWARE members (not sure prepared by who, but it comes in the AWARE envelop):
In Mar 2008 AGM, the FINAL amendments is that “Male associate members shall not be entitled to: vote at General Meetings; nor stand for election whether for office or Ordinary Board Membership.”
In Mar 2009 AGM, the PROPOSED amendments is that “Associate Members shall enjoy all the privileges of ordinary members Including the right to vote except that Associate Members shall not be entitled to stand for office as Office Bearers.”
The EXPLANATION for the Mar 2009 AGM is, “This is subject to majority vote. This proposal reopens the issue of male voting rights. This again reflects the broader vision of ‘gender equality’ and men and women working together to achieve this goal. To clearly state the rights of ordinary and associate members.’
In both the AGMs, the proposals were not accepted.
@LC:
Quoting from today’s ST article “Old guard members counter allegations of a pro-gay stance”
WANTS TO LET MEN VOTE
Former Aware president Dana Lam, 57: ‘We have been discussing this in Aware for years. We are a bit divided over this.
We women have been saying that decisions – public, personal, family – cannot be made by only men; that they have to be made jointly with men. If we walk the talk, then we have to give men the right to vote.
On the other hand, some of us feel we are not that ready to admit a male voice in the organisation. We are still debating this, and debate is healthy.’
To federika:
sorry for the late reply. In “gay rights”, “gay” is used as an adjective, not as a noun. Quoting wikipedia yet again,
“The term gay (ɡeɪ) was originally used, until well into the mid-20th century, primarily to refer to feelings of being “carefree,” “happy,” or “bright and showy”
“By the mid-20th century, “gay” was well-established as an antonym for “straight” (which had connotations of respectability), and to refer to the lifestyles of unmarried and/or unattached people.”
“In mid-20th century Britain, where male homosexuality was illegal until the Sexual Offences Act 1967, to openly identify someone as homosexual was considered very offensive and an accusation of serious criminal activity. Additionally, none of the words describing any aspect of homosexuality were considered suitable for polite society. Consequently, a number of ironic euphemisms were used to hint at suspected homosexuality. Examples include “Such a nice man,” “Such a gay man,” “Such beautiful handwriting,” all with the stress deliberately on the otherwise completely innocent adjective.”
“The term “gay” can also be used as an adjective to describe things related to homosexuals or things which are part of the LBGT culture. For example, while a gay bar is not itself homosexual, using the term “gay” as an adjective to describe the bar indicates that the bar is either homosexually-oriented, caters primarily to a homosexual clientèle, or is otherwise part of homosexual culture.”
In my context is about women’s right to choose to stay single, or to choose to be with whom they want to spend the rest of their life, but anyway,
1) sometimes that means breaking out of some outdated caste system,
2) sometimes it means getting out of forced marriages(even to the extent of eloping or breaking away with their family),
3) sometimes it means being with someone Not belonging to the same race,
4) and sometimes it means Not being with someone of the opposite sex.
All the above represents some form of social taboo/stigma, whether be it in the past or in the present.
I am not saying that point 4 supersedes points 1 to 3; rather I am arguing that point 4 is as important as points 1 to 3. It is a personal choice (and we all knew it), and it is still their right to choose. Who are we(as society) to rob them of that choice?
I am not sure how many people are familiar with the feminism movement. I will now attempt to shorten the feminism article from Wikipedia.
“Feminism is the belief that women should have political, social, sexual, intellectual and economic rights equal to those of men. It involves various movements, theories, and philosophies, all concerned with issues of gender difference, that advocate equality for women and the campaign for women’s rights and interests.”
“According to some, the history of feminism can be divided into three waves.
“The first wave was in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries,
the second was in the 1960s and 1970s,
and the third extends from the 1990s to the present.”
“First-wave feminism refers to a period of feminist activity during the nineteenth century and early twentieth century in the United Kingdom and the United States. Originally it focused on the promotion of equal contract and property rights for women and the opposition to chattel marriage and ownership of married women (and their children) by their husbands. However, by the end of the nineteenth century, activism focused primarily on gaining political power, particularly the right of women’s suffrage.”
“Second-wave feminism refers to a period of feminist activity beginning in the early 1960s and lasting through the late 1980s. … Second-wave feminism has continued to exist since that time and coexists with what is termed third-wave feminism. The scholar Estelle Freedman compares first and second-wave feminism saying that the first wave focused on rights such as suffrage, whereas the second wave was largely concerned with other issues of equality, such as ending discrimination.”
“Third-wave feminism began in the early 1990s, arising as a response to perceived failures of the second wave and also as a response to the backlash against initiatives and movements created by the second wave. Third-wave feminism seeks to challenge or avoid what it deems the second wave’s essentialist definitions of femininity, which (according to them) over-emphasize the experiences of upper middle-class white women.”
“A post-structuralist interpretation of gender and sexuality is central to much of the third wave’s ideology. Third-wave feminists often focus on “micro-politics” and challenge the second wave’s paradigm as to what is, or is not, good for females. … ”
“Third-wave feminism also contains internal debates between difference feminists
1)who believes that there are important differences between the sexes) and those
2)who believe that there are no inherent differences between the sexes and contend that gender roles are due to social conditioning.”
“Feminist theory is an extension of feminism into theoretical or philosophical fields. It encompasses work in a variety of disciplines, including anthropology, sociology, economics, women’s studies, literary criticism,[58][59] art history, psychoanalysis and philosophy.
Feminist theory aims to understand gender inequality and focuses on gender politics, power relations, and sexuality. While providing a critique of these social and political relations, much of feminist theory also focuses on the promotion of women’s rights and interests. Themes explored in feminist theory include discrimination, stereotyping, objectification (especially sexual objectification), oppression, and patriarchy.”
“The feminist movement has effected change in Western society, including women’s suffrage; greater access to education; more nearly equitable pay with men; the right to initiate divorce proceedings and “no fault” divorce; and the right of women to make individual decisions regarding pregnancy (including access to contraceptives and abortion); and the right to own property.”
“The increased entry of women into the workplace beginning in the twentieth century has affected gender roles and the division of labor within households. … evidence that in two-career couples, men and women, on average, spend about equal amounts of time working, but women still spend more time on housework. … in some cases, women may prevent the equal participation of men in housework and parenting.”
“Feminist criticisms of men’s contributions to child care and domestic labor in the Western middle class are typically centered around the idea that it is unfair for women to be expected to perform more than half of a household’s domestic work and child care when both members of the relationship also work outside the home. Several studies provide statistical evidence that the financial income of married men does not affect their rate of attending to household duties.”
(end of citation)
The thing is, women are beginning to enjoy some sense of equal rights NOW because of tremendous past efforts to overcome some of the toughest forms of discrimination known towards humankind.
Now someone claims to be a “feminist” mentor and she is “Disturbed by what she saw as signs that it was promoting lesbianism and homosexuality, she began urging women she knew to challenge Aware’s attempts to redefine marriage and families.”
That statement is like a insult for people who has been contributing towards the feminist cause since the very beginning…
Crux of story if old AWARE flex towards lesbianism thro promotion in schools etc, then it is right that someone make sure they do not subtly or purposely enter into this stream. Just like govt say no red light, bugis was now cleaned but look at geylang now, such a hotspot u do not believe Singapore is turn into a real RED DOT. Dont let claims that seem so innocent that things are ok bypass us.
[...] well-known that Pastor Derek Hong of the Anglican Church Of Our Saviour (COOS), which seems to be the unifying demographic in the collective profile of the new AWARE exco and then some (pdf alt), has raised a rallying [...]
Just been reading: Well we can be in the same school and never knew one another, we can stay in the same block for 5 years and never know one another, hack we can stay on the same floor for that matter and never know one another seeing maybe but u don’t call someone u see as someone u know right… what more being in the same church does not mean they know each other… call people a liar base on that they are from the same church… think u are just jumping into conclusions.
At the end of the day we all just want to hear what we want to hear, isn’t it
Imagine you go to a theatre and suddenly, the person sitting besides you is from your secondary school, and the person beside the person is also from your secondary school, heck the whole row is from your secondary school.
Either you jio the persons besides you to watch the movie together or you are watching a school play man.