S377a Not Repealed

[TopChinese]

Oh well.. guess we're all still criminals here. We are the same as the rapists, murderers and child molesters.

In the latest reading of the Penal Code yesterday, Gahman must says we must show that Singapore is a conservative society. Singapore cannot allow homosexuality, cohabitation outside marriage, adultery, gambling, alcohol consumption and prostitution.

Oh wait... all except the first are legal.

But don't worry, government won't punish you because they won't enforce this law if you do it privately. Go ahead, please go have sex with other men and break the law in private.

Just do it quietly ok.

[Asura]

TC, I am not surprise at the result, why are you so sad? You really do think gahman will ever repeal it?

[Buaya]

Frankly, I am a little disappointed... The reason they give is that most Singaporeans are still conservative...

Ya, my head... please go and see them make out in public, see the Malay guy whose hands were underneath his girl friends shirt covered by her tudong, see the Chinese girl who was JO-ing her bf on the bus etc...

They claimed they interviewed and consulted groups and societies and also random people on the street... I wonder who else they asked besides those fundamental Christian extremists... They probably interviewed people they know who will be too paiseh to say they think homosexuality is natural and not a crime...

KNN...

[Guest artemov]

Let's not forget its now life imprisonment for assaulting the President and the MPs.

[Guest Guest]

Many conservation hypocrites in S'pore. Behind closed door, they sex like any wild animals. Sucking pussies, assholes, cocks. anal sex, etc.

[oralb]

a transcript from Sir Ian McKellan's recent interview on Singapore 377a law

"And then we come to the one thing I don't like about Singapore, which is 377A. You know that law. It's a British law, and why the hell you've not got rid of it, I'm not quite sure. Well, I am sure, because it's taken us a long time in the United Kingdom and the rest of the world to deal with these old problems, these ancient attitudes which need to be removed if we're going to be part of the 21st Century. So it's very important that gay people, wherever they are, should identify themselves, stick up for themselves, represent themselves, modestly and positively, so the rest of the world knows that we're here and we're not going to go away. And we're happy to be here."

our gahmen is telling us that we are still sticking to colonial outdated law...

[skylancer]

i agree with Buaya had posted earlier.

Nowadays Singaporean are conservative due to the strict law.And today upgrade to expanding areas include overseas but if without the law, what will happen? Will Singaporean everyone be nice ppl? I doubt so...

Anyway, all we can do is wait and give the support to those communities that trying to help us.

to those communities that trying to fight for the old law, jia you!

:thumb:

[Guest Guest]

Many conservation hypocrites in S'pore. Behind closed door, they sex like any wild animals. Sucking pussies, assholes, cocks. anal sex, etc.

Now heterosexual men and women suck cocks, pussies, anal sex all legal in private.

[Guest Guest]

i agree with Buaya had posted earlier.

Nowadays Singaporean are conservative due to the strict law.And today upgrade to expanding areas include overseas but if without the law, what will happen? Will Singaporean everyone be nice ppl? I doubt so...

Anyway, all we can do is wait and give the support to those communities that trying to help us.

to those communities that trying to fight for the old law, jia you!

:thumb:

If govt know tight ass still existed in gay circle, they would probably have a 2nd thought to repeal the penal code. Not all gay are loose ok. :yuk:

[GachiMuchi]

Oops, I deleted the duplicated post who was from Tightass.

[Tight Ass]

Oops, I deleted the duplicated post who was from Tightass.

Ooi! I am trying to tell pappy to get out of my uncaring elitist tight ass. :yuk:

[Guest Guest]

IMO the surprising thing is that there are gays who are surprised by this!

[GachiMuchi]

Hmm...I have yet to try an "uncaring elitist tight ass" before.

[citiguy]

"Govt has decided to retain Section 377A said that public feedback on the issue had been emotional, divided and strongly expressed, with the majority calling for the section to be retained." - ST 18 Sept 07

Was there a survey done? If so, how come the survey was never disclosed? What kind of feedback are they talking about? What's the sample size? Statistically significant? Majority = 51%?

These days the garhman loves to abuse statistics. Firstly they say most Singaporeans are living longer (median age = 85). How did they arrive at the conclusion? No mention of that. Now, when they mention that majority feel that Section 377A should stay, where is the evidence?

Indranee Rajah pointed out that since majority is not comfortable, the section must stay. However, MHA would not actively prosecute people under that section. Then why have the stupid law there in the first place if it's not going to be enforced? Isn't that as good as telling people we, the gay community has to be sacrificed so that the garhman would not lose popularity and more importantly your crosses during D day. KNS

[skylancer]

"Govt has decided to retain Section 377A said that public feedback on the issue had been emotional, divided and strongly expressed, with the majority calling for the section to be retained." - ST 18 Sept 07

Was there a survey done? If so, how come the survey was never disclosed? What kind of feedback are they talking about? What's the sample size? Statistically significant? Majority = 51%?

These days the garhman loves to abuse statistics. Firstly they say most Singaporeans are living longer (median age = 85). How did they arrive at the conclusion? No mention of that. Now, when they mention that majority feel that Section 377A should stay, where is the evidence?

Indranee Rajah pointed out that since majority is not comfortable, the section must stay. However, MHA would not actively prosecute people under that section. Then why have the stupid law there in the first place if it's not going to be enforced? Isn't that as good as telling people we, the gay community has to be sacrificed so that the garhman would not lose popularity and more importantly your crosses during D day. KNS

hmm.. long time don hear your reply..

Anyway, all we can do now is just give those community support them loh..

Jia you!

[Guest Guest]

I think it's a REALLY long road to change this diresome scenario. We're talking about a country when if you strut inside your flat nude, and your neighbour sees it, you get sued.

And don't forget who the minister of home affairs is.

That's essentially what Singapore still is. A third-world country pretending to be first world. Trying to boost up the economic figures with statistical abuse. Slapping any policy they wish on you and suing your entire family rotten if you disagree. Desperately disillusioned into thinking buying sportsmen from overseas equate international achievement.

I only have one suggestion. Get out before it sinks.

[Guest artemov]

Nicely put, Guest at 12:03am.

Ever since the Queen became PM, things are going backwards. Like father like son.

[nvms]

Nicely put, Guest at 12:03am.

Ever since the Queen became PM, things are going backwards. Like father like son.

Wah! "Queen" u also dares to say it out.... U bery

[TopChinese]

Nicely put, Guest at 12:03am.

Ever since the Queen became PM, things are going backwards. Like father like son.

You know they say about closetted homos who are afraid of their own hunger for cock. I've always wondered how any str8 man can stay married to a wife looking like that. And there was the time I saw one of his bodyguards dancing without a shirt in DJ Station. Was wondering if his principal was upstairs in the dark room.

Well, according to the Straits Times, 7 out of 10 Singaporeans have negative impressions of gays and find gays "disgusting". There was no explaination on whether these people also find adultery or digging your nose disgusting. Or why we must make such "disgusting" behaviour criminal.

[Guest artemov]

Aiyoh such surveys are always skewed and biased. Like they say, they are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics

If you ask me if I find cunninglingus disgusting, of course I will puke at the mere mention of the word. But that doesn't mean I want muff-diving criminalised. Look at the questions they asked; mostly personal and emotional type questions. No straight forward questions like "Should 377A be repealed?" or "Should homosexuals be given basic rights?".

[Guest Guest]

Nicely put, Guest at 12:03am.

Ever since the Queen became PM, things are going backwards. Like father like son.

You know they say about closetted homos who are afraid of their own hunger for cock. I've always wondered how any str8 man can stay married to a wife looking like that. And there was the time I saw one of his bodyguards dancing without a shirt in DJ Station. Was wondering if his principal was upstairs in the dark room.

Well, according to the Straits Times, 7 out of 10 Singaporeans have negative impressions of gays and find gays "disgusting". There was no explaination on whether these people also find adultery or digging your nose disgusting. Or why we must make such "disgusting" behaviour criminal.

Nowadays people who believe in Shit times are getting very rare. You are one rare species.

[Nice-36]

I am not too sure what I was more disappointed with - the skewness of this article or why NTU had chosen to trumpet her findings in a prominent manner such as this. It is best to take the results of this survey with a pinch of salt. We have no way of assessing the veracity of the results or if those survey questions were unbiasedly articulated . Taking it at face value may give an unfair statistical portrayal of the gay community.

I am also disappointed with our million$ ivory-tower pussies in allowing the aggressive religious agenda of one or two religions to dictate S377A law reforms- or in this case, the lack thereof. Singapore is a secular nation and accordingly, our laws cannot and should not be based on the Bible, or any other holy text. Doing that is blatantly ignoring the pluralistic nature of Singapore's multireligious and multiracial community. This is potentially a divisive agenda.

Laws should be based on the principles of justice and equality, and whether they cause direct harm to anyone, or infringe on the rights of others. As far as homosexual acts between consenting adults are concerned, it is guilty of neither. Therefore, I really fail to see how homosexuality is deserving of being considered a crime. By itself, it does not harm anyone, except possibly the delicate sensibilities of ultra-conservatives.

If one really wants to advocate the criminalization of homosexual acts, then one should use secular reasoning to justify one's stance. It is presumptuous to think it is self-evident that gay acts are immoral and wanton. I am not swayed by the argument that sex is meant primarily for procreation and anal sex between 2 men is wrong - as this is the oft quoted reason to discriminate. Simply because anal sex is also prevalent amongst heterosexual men. This argument can be easily turned on its head - tat anal sex for heterosexual couple is a bigger perversion. Is it not more disgusting n just as morally wrong choosing to ram the back while the 'legal' hole is just next door? Sex this way is not for procreation either. Why the double standard for the same act ?

Religions have long been complicit or even active in the demonization of gays in Singapore, especially when they are the religions practiced by a powerful majority. Their modus operandi is simple yet heinous - identify a minority group that they can pinpoint as sinful - while at the same time, holding themselves high as the epitome of probity. Homosexuals are defined, not as individuals with rights, but purely by the way they have sex - the typical Straw Man argument of mischaracterizing the opponent and then vilifying against this mischaracterization. Here we see bigotry being passed off as intelligence and prejudice being masqueraded as justice.

All this discomfort about having gays in their midst is nothing more than rampant religious and heterosexual hypocrisy.

And so, I would like to invite those 7 out of 10 people who assert homosexual agendas to declare their own agendas, openly and transparently.

[citiguy]

Ha ha ha... Finally English lesson again after such a long wait.

Anyway, The Straits Times actually used data adapted from Pew Global Attitudes Project conducted in 2003, which can only mean for all we know the data is outdated. How fair can this be? You judge for yourself.

Look at the way the questions in the NTU survey were phrased. They used negative words such as "wrong" and "disgusting". Surveys conducted in this manner are skewed and biased. In marketing and organisational psychology, it was mentioned that these words will play up negative feelings and thus negative response.

I am trying to be objective but this survey is trash and so is the article. Obviously, it was pieced together hastily so as to support the garhman's stand. A survey with a sample size of 1000 people and they use it to put down a community of perhaps more than a few thousand people. Absurd.

[Baloo]

as the learned and educated that we are... we KNOW that surveys can always 'prove' whatever they set out to prove.

it's the way questions are designed, and the leading questions that lead to 'logical conclusions... as designed by the people who set those questions - whether wittingly or unwittingly.

how about this: we get a known supporter survey company to go out and get another 1000 sample survey to prove that 80% surveyed are pro-freedom of sexual choices? it's just the fees right? haha...

our government is very protective of their power, and their position, and their 'support' in the eyes of the majority.

pity we dun do referendums here... where people get to vote on singular issues... den we can see how our 'secret' vote will really say...

mostly in the USA or elsewhere where municipal governments do lots of votes on issues, most abstain and wudn't care one way or the other. those who do care will go out to vote... and the decision falls one way or the other. that IS democracy. the right to chose NOT to vote is still a right - it means it dun matter if it is one way or the other to the voter.

unfortunately, it's twisted to say - 'see, it dun work. how can it be a decision if only 30% of the eligible voted?' but it does work - 70% don't care if it's either way. The 30% who cares voted, and decision is reached... the 70% is not gonna protest - they had their chance, and they WILL live with the decision. that's democracy at a higher plane... unfortunately, you put in Stinkapoleans, that 70% will kao beh kao bu EITHER way... becos they waiting to kbkb for the sake of it being who Stinkapoleans are... but that isn't so where democracies do work.

in any case, the farce has been farted, the bands had played, the 'action' all acted out leow... so back to 'reality' that was decided long ago by that elite bunch of men and women we compulsorily voted in... and we gave them the mandate to decide for us... so they did... so live with it lor...

i wonder... if after i retire and withdrawn most of my CPF dare i step out and declare myself PLU and find others to join as a party contesting a ... nah...

PLUs are too scattered all over to really make a stand huh... unless we all up and move to a single ward constituency and actually form a majority there... hahaha... but go on dreaming Baloo... PLUs here all play teochew music best... where got come together and be counted for real one? jiak ba boh sai pang.....

so... be doomed to live in the underworld. and hope we dun irritate the staunch straight homophobe neighbours with binos sneak peeking at your apartment to call the law in to specifically NAIL your ass for all to see...

time to raise funds to show other countries enough cash to migrate... PR oso shiok... migrate even better... most real 3rd world countries would take you for a song... rite? i wonder how hard is it for us to migrate to China... can really move to the mountains to stay... jungle love is so fun...

or Tibet... or South America... Kenya... Brazil... Thailand!!... Burma... Laos... wa so much choices!! Vietnam even...

B

[chubaholic]

If PLUs were to form the government, what would they do for the plight of fellow homosexuals?

Have equal rights for them, legalize their marriages, allow Pride parades, blah, blah blah or

they could make heterosexuality illegal! :clap:

Wah, cannot fathom the elation of suddenly having so many ex-straight chub cuties to choose from if that happens.

Sigh. If only people know how to stand in others' shoes. One will never feel the pain (or pleasure ) unless one is pricked (pun intended).

Wait, isn't sexual orientation discrimination in the same league as racial, sex, age, religion, creed discrimation?

[Tight Ass]

If PLUs were to form the government, what would they do for the plight of fellow homosexuals?

Have equal rights for them, legalize their marriages, allow Pride parades, blah, blah blah or

they could make heterosexuality illegal! :clap:

Wah, cannot fathom the elation of suddenly having so many ex-straight chub cuties to choose from if that happens.

Sigh. If only people know how to stand in others' shoes. One will never feel the pain (or pleasure ) unless one is pricked (pun intended).

Wait, isn't sexual orientation discrimination in the same league as racial, sex, age, religion, creed discrimation?

If gay govern Singapore, this island will be quite hip and colorful and all the pink dollars will be flowing in from all over the globe. No need to worry about economy will flounder. Please remember to make me the chairman of Tourism Board if that day cum..

[TopChinese]

Here's a good point raised by Mr Wang here:

Criminal acts are acts that 10 out of 10 people will agree are wrong. For example, in a survey, 10 out of 10 people will think that murder, rape, treason, shoplifting must be punished by law.

Only 7 out of 10 people disapprove of homosexuality.

Homosexuality should not be a criminal act.

[Asura]

KNS

mai hu lim beh kim meh dio Toto, ho wa dio tau jiong jit eh lang nia, lim beh chia dua dua eh Survey Company ke meng juan sin ga bo lang,ho yi kua yi ga zai yea.

lang sai zeng wu!

[gz69]

Fret not.

Singapore can be amusing. It tries to be puritanical long past the age of the puritans. By all means punish the paedophile but trying to extend its laws overseas is ridiculous.

By all means punish those who molest (hetero or gay), who rapes, who violates the dignity of others.

By all means keep those out-dated laws in the books but maintain the status quo i.e. let those gay gathering places continue operating. That is a big concession already.

Gays should keep a low profile. Society is not ready for it. Not in Asia anyway. Nothing to be gained by loudly complaining. Is your gay life more restricted than before? Are you prevented from meeting other gays in Spore or goiing to those spas, pubs and places where PLUs gather?

Gays are by nature creative. So, we will always find ways to live our private lives. It is the Great Brothehood that history has never erased and will continue to thrive as long as mankind exists.

[TopChinese]

I don't doubt that life will go on. But how will the law protect you in situations like this:

- Your boss finds out you're gay. He invents some excuse to fire you.

- Your bf of 21 years is in the hospital on his death bed. His family/friends refuse to let you be by his side.

- You break up with your slutty ex. He takes the photos of you getting fxxked and reports to the police. The police has to take action.

- You hug your bf in public. Some mother complain to police that you were committing a lewd act in front of her child.

- You accidentally left your curtains open when your bf visits. Some KPO auntie take photo and post to STOMP. Your friends/family disown you because you're a faggot.

How creative can you get in these situations?

[bearhunt]

"ST Sep 20, 2007

7 in 10 frown on homosexuality, NTU survey finds

People most likely to be anti-gay: The religious and those who conform to social norms

By Radha Basu"

I stopped reading after this sentence. Why?

People who identify themselves to be strongly religious (not spiritual, religious.. there's a difference here) also almost always swear to live by some kinda book.

And most books say that homosexuality is wrong. Even the rebel Zen mystic Osho states that homosexuality is unnatural, because it is a coming together of two same types of bodies and mind, therefore evolution cannot proceed.

(The whole point of Nature is of course to evolve, and since evolution can only take place in the interaction of opposites, therefore same-sexuality does not allow the necessary interplay for evolution to proceed. Hence, homosexuality is un-natural.

"But Mr Osho sir, aren't tops and btms opposites?")

Most religious people are also taught to believe in some sort of heavenly or divine punishment, and their relationship with G_d resembles some kinda twisted affair between the psychotic all-powerful jailor and the smart tragic mouse. They can't help it, most people who subscribe fervently to organized religion simply can't think for themselves. (Not that I blame them; they're punished for doing so. Penalties range from excommunication in some form to a very public flaying and crucification.)

Given such a context, is it any wonder that religious people who otherwise mean no harm to nobody but themselves are forced to disapprove of homosexuality, cos hey didn't I read that somewhere in my favourite book sometime over the weekend?

I won't even touch on the second group identified in the article - the ones who adhere to social norms.

Thusly, in 16 words, the entire article collapses in onto itself, revealing the biased and unfair foundations that prompted it in the first place. If NTU was trying to pander to the religious right, please seek a less blatant route. Or at least listen to your PR people. Oh wait, you probably can't do that cos they're likely to be gay. :/

Lest you think that I am targeting one group only, let me bring you back to my earlier point.

Even more "tolerant" religions state somewhere that the idea of homosexuality is "not in line with Nature's intentions." (Or as Chow Yun Fatt's warlord father claims thunderingly to his chrysanthemum obsessed wife, "you are against heaven's order!") I strongly believe that it is because of how the understanding of "the way of things" is intrepreted.

Does Osho say that homosexuality is wrong? Never. In fact, he recognises that that is simply a facet of your Self, and encourages you to have fun with it. Sooner or later, you'll grow out of it. Just like sooner or later you'll grow out of the things you do and say and believe in and transform into a different Self. He will bless you and wish you well on your journey.

In comparison, what do religious people do? Bleat incessantly about how you're going to Hell to gnash your teeth forever and ever in lakes of fire and offer vigorously and vocally to help you get there, while pruning away your rights, diginity, health and sanity, until you end up, as Mr Otto Fong puts it, "a bonsai tree."

The mystic recognises the impermanence of all things, and knows that Nature evolves in its own way and time. Life is a series of experiences, like moving pictures

across a monitor, or shadows of clouds over still water. You have all the time in the world to be and choose who you are and who you want to be. It never ends because it never has to end. What is, is simply what is.

The religious hold on to whatever the leaders said last year about who they are and what they should do and how they should think. They think (because they are told) that Life is about waiting for the eternal reward, (something to the price of 100 virgins I heard... but then virgin's aren't much fun. For a start, they don't know how to suck very well. :/ ) and if they just manage not to slip up too much while they're enduring their exodus, they can rest forever in all eternity. A lifetime of pain and denial and

suffering in exchange for an eternity of afterlife bliss? Hell, yeah!

The religious can't / won't see beyond the circle, declaring everything outside it to be false.

The spiritual sees and knows that he is inside and outside of the circle. He sometimes suspects he may be the circle.

The mystic knows she is the circle AND doesn't get hung up about it.

Which of these are you, Mr/Ms Radha Basu?

[bearhunt]

Fret not.

Singapore can be amusing.  It tries to be puritanical long past the age of the puritans.  By all means punish the paedophile but trying to extend its laws overseas is ridiculous. 

By all means punish those who molest (hetero or gay), who rapes, who violates the dignity of others.

By all means keep those out-dated laws in the books but maintain the status quo i.e. let those gay gathering places continue operating.  That is a big concession already.

Gays should keep a low profile.  Society is not ready for it.  Not in Asia anyway.  Nothing to be gained by loudly complaining.  Is your gay life more restricted than before?  Are you prevented from meeting other gays in Spore or goiing to those spas, pubs and places where PLUs gather?

Gays are by nature creative.  So, we will always find ways to live our private lives.  It is the Great Brothehood that history has never erased and will continue to thrive as long as mankind exists.

whatever TopChinese said.

[TopChinese]

There you go... this is the Singaporeans we're dealing with. People like Ms De Souza here. Idiots who think that we can spread gaydom like a disease.

If it was so easy "to flip st8 guys", I would be enjoying topping my Sec 3 E Maths teacher and one of my clients in a hot 3some right now.

Gay teacher's outing not appropriate

IN THE letter, 'Gay teacher's outing a milestone in debate' (ST, Sept 18), Dr Peter Goh Kok Yong stated that '... heterosexuality has always been the biased model'.

It is actually the natural model, based on the physical attributes of males and females. Moreover, it is the best model for the benefit of mankind.

Yes, teachers are supposed to provide 'unbiased advice to young students' but who is to ensure this? In fact, parents are supposed to do this important work, not teachers.

Students are very impressionable and prone to hero-worshipping teachers that they like. By admitting that he is gay, Mr Otto Fong has issued an open invitation to students to find out about his lifestyle and perhaps some of them might want to follow in his footsteps.

It is the gay lifestyle and its implications that most people are wary of.

There are gays who live their choice of lifestyle quietly but there are others who aggressively try to influence people to follow suit.

These are the ones who, if they are teachers, may cause the most harm in schools and elsewhere.

Let us not be too harsh on gays but let us not be blind to the dangers they pose to society and mankind.

Remember that, very often, silence means consent.

Patricia Maria De Souza (Ms)

[bearhunt]

Kinda reminds me of this comment a friend of mine made way back in 02 when PM Goh gave his Time Magazine interview. We were talking about how the Government is finally easing up.

My friend who is straight said, "I hope the government doesn't be too open about gays cos then everyone's gonna turn gay."

I heard about his comment from an ex-lesbian friend of mine- I wasn't there when he said it, and good thing too cos I'd have been really, really upset, thoughtless though it may be.

I mean... why are straight people so damn afraid of turning gay once its decriminalized / made open? Don't they understand that sexuality is intrinsic? They can't turn gay with the lifting of the law just like I can't turn straight no matter how many skirts are lifted in front of me. Either you are or you aren't!

Such comments and thinking simply leads me to believe that deep down inside straight people are afraid of gays. And I wonder why? Is it because they feel threatened because we dress better than them?

Then there's the ever-present straight male fantasy of fxxking a butch and turning her straight. Wtf.

It is lucky the majority of my friends are straight people and over the years through dialogue and communication and carefully posed questions we've managed to build up an understanding that I, being the only gay person that most of them know, is simply who I am, and they are who they are. And despite our differences we share some very common and universal needs, wants, hopes, fears, desires simply because at the heart of it all we are all human.

My straight friends are comfortable enough with my sexuality to catch me perving at that hunky bear across the street and to tease me about it!

[Baloo]

I think your friends are referring to the closeted straight acting gay coming out of their closets...

it would appear that many 'straight' men 'turn' gay...

i wonder if married men who married out of family obligations and procreation instincts would 'come out'...

but government is very clever. it has never said being gay was illegal. Being discovered having sex in the context of that law, is.

so you can be a cat, but you cannot meow... becos meowing is illegal... cats are not illegal...

erm... did i get that right?

:whistle:

[Guest Guest]

Just a thought ..... what exactly are the heteroes "conservatives" homophobes afraid of? Gays or they themselves turning gay?

I think that the repeal is pretty much not a surprise, but i feel that its not that SG is "generally conservative", but just too religious and not educated enough about homosexuality. Regardless of the whether homosexuality shld be right or wrong, these people fail to understand that

- its not a contagious disease or a medical condition

- despite the we love or have sex with, we are still living, breathing , regular members of society who pay taxes.

- it takes more than sex to define a gay person. 2 straight guys can f**k each other up n still not be considered gay.

- being gay is not a choice, and neither is being hetero. if someone says that choses to be or not to be gay, he is either bi or in denial.

- there is no "gay lifetsyle"(lts alone "hetero lifetsyle") gay or str8, your sexual orientation does not define your lifestyle. whether your a slut n likes to sleep around promiscuously or not is more of an example of defining a lifestyle.

[gz69]

I don't doubt that life will go on. But how will the law protect you in situations like this:

- Your boss finds out you're gay. He invents some excuse to fire you.

- Your bf of 21 years is in the hospital on his death bed. His family/friends refuse to let you be by his side.

- You break up with your slutty ex. He takes the photos of you getting fxxked and reports to the police. The police has to take action.

- You hug your bf in public. Some mother complain to police that you were committing a lewd act in front of her child.

- You accidentally left your curtains open when your bf visits. Some KPO auntie take photo and post to STOMP. Your friends/family disown you because you're a faggot.

How creative can you get in these situations?

Top Chinese,

We can always speculate on events but really how often does such events exist and can anyone quote actual incidents?

- How does the boss finds out that his staff is gay? Maybe the boss knows that a certain spa or bar is gay-oriented and saw his staff going in there. Or maybe the boss saw that person being initimate in public. This is where discretion is important. Even then, unless the boss is homophobic, he may not relate a gay to job performance. And unless the boss and staff is already on bad terms... speculative at best.

- The bf is on deathbed and the family does not allow the gay to be at his bedside. This seems like a sad TV drama. Or perhaps the family already knew both were gays and were openly opposed. Yes, this can happen but then life can be painful. It is our fate then and we have to accept the cruelty of fate.

- An ex manages to take pics of a gay having sex. Now, this is really the stuff of imagination. Does one happen to have sex in public and being fxxked openly in a gay spa and the bf is so vindictive and he was allowed to bring a camera into the spa? I find it weird that such a scenario can happen so easily.

- Hugging a gay in public is a violation of which law? And that is a lewd act? When was the last time, the police has prosecuted such a case?

- Two gays were exposed on STOMP? Man, the imagination really gets very creative here.

We can go on inventing our fears. Let's face the reality. Society in Singapore is not ready to accept gay life. And may never accept in our lifetime. So, does that mean we live in fear of exposure and be so paranoid each time we go to a bar, spa or visit our bf?

Or do we live our life with dignity, with courage and be confident of our talents. We can survive and lead a fruitful life. Do not create enemies. Do good to others where possible. And be at peace with God and Nature.

The choice is ours.

[cw30]

if the white is really being serious, the spa will no longer exists. It takes time ... there is still major resistance here in our society ... if you ever want the society to accept, start from your family and come out to your parents, relative and frds.