Jump to content
Male HQ

[Reddit] A Sg Gay man's response to Effect of 377A

HendryTan

By HendryTan
in Blowing Wind Main Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

HendryTan Experienced

HendryTan

Posted
Posted

This conversation took place on Reddit Singapore in the topic of  BBC's Hardtalk, an interview show on controversial topics is doing a segment with PM Lee. Topics include gay marriage ....

 

A gay man talked about his experience on how when his ex-bf stalked him and he had to go to the police. How 377A  effected him. 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

[–]thr0w4g4y 86 points  

Honestly as a gay Singaporean man, I'd never given a fuck about 377A. I mean seriously, who cares about whether the government is okay with us fucking in the comfort of our homes??

Until an incident, that is.

At the police headquarters, I was having my statement taken by a police officer on a case against my ex-boyfriend-turned-stalker. I was asked to comment on my stalker's claim that we had sexual relations during the course of our relationship. Beyond any amount of indignation, I felt fear overwhelm me.

I wavered before raving on about how this had nothing to do whatsoever with the stalking case. The police officer decided to grill me further by telling me it was best for me to tell the truth. With much courage, I insisted that I had no comment.

I think people hardly realize the far-reaching effects of the prejudice that is imposed upon the community by the mere existence of 377A.

It's true that repealing 377A is not going to change the largely negative attitudes Singaporeans have against us; in fact I know for sure it would get much worse. But till when do we have to LLST and say "aiya just gotta live with it" when at the same time the slightest glorification or even just portrayal of homosexuality in the media is quickly censored and alternative voices like Pink Dot are getting threatened by increasingly strict regulations? Said "social attitudes" are hardly going to change that way, when at the same time the law sees us as criminals.

[–]jlonsoChili Crab Nachos 15 points  

I was asked to comment on my stalker's claim that we had sexual relations during the course of our relationship. Beyond any amount of indignation, I felt fear overwhelm me... The police officer decided to grill me further by telling me it was best for me to tell the truth. With much courage, I insisted that I had no comment.

I PLEAD THE FIFTH. I'm really glad you didn't say it cause it would be most probably be used against you.

[–]thr0w4g4y 19 points  

I for one didn't and probably till today don't believe they would use it against me if I were to give an explicit answer to the question.

Either way, my reaction to that question was livid (I'm otherwise very meek), enough to raise suspicion so they could launch a separate investigation into my sex life if they wanted to, in which case it begs the question of how does that play into the "377A won't be actively enforced" narrative that the government has put forth?

It would be ridiculous and most likely cause public outrage if a harassment victim had to suffer further invasion of privacy by the police and become a subject of investigation as a result of being truthful on contents of his relationship not relevant at all to the original harassment case at hand.

I myself had to dwell for a very long time before deciding whether I wanted to pursue a case against my stalker for fear of 377A. I had to choose my battles -- be stalked for what seemed like the rest of my life or drop the hammer on him. It took me courage to choose the latter.

But not every victim of a case involving a gay individual is going to have that much forethought and confidence. What if it were a 17-year old male victim of catfishing whose meeting with a 19-turned-40-year-old man turned awry into rape? I've been turned to for advice regarding a case like this because of his concerns on 377A. I had my reservations too because this would involve direct admission to a potential crime under 377A from the get-go. Was I going to encourage the victim to do it regardless and perhaps get him into trouble??

377A was never retained to govern what people do in their bedrooms. It was there to be a symbolism of our society's morals and beliefs of what a family should be yadayada, but at the same time it's put a lot of institutionalized prejudice into the system against the marginalized -- from the case assessor at court who went "your ex-BOYfriend?! okay... shall we call him your friend then?" to the police officer who told me his investigation would only entail taking my stalker's statement and my statement even when there were telco records due for investigation.

Above all, it's also put a lot of fear into people. And we didn't have to live like this if it weren't for 377A.

[–]jlonsoChili Crab Nachos 1 point  

Kudos for your bravery mate, well said.

[–]thr0w4g4y 1 point  

Thanks!

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[–]ha1fhumanbo liao troll 3 points  

I was asked to comment on my stalker's claim that we had sexual relations during the course of our relationship

Was it relevant to the case? Couldn't you just ignore the question? I know that's not the point, but I don't think a LEO should be prying into one's private life.

[–]jlonsoChili Crab Nachos 14 points  

Yeah. Give the officer, "Let's say i'm a girl, and my ex-bf is harassing me, will you ask me if i have sex with my bf before?"

WHO THE HELL SAYS THAT SIA

[–]thr0w4g4y 5 points  

Yup I was completely flummoxed by that question. It just turned out to be SOP, i.e. my stalker made the claim so I had to respond. But I don't get how his claim was even taken into consideration. He every day come my house and workplace kaopeh kaobu, got anything to do with whether we hei xiu hei xiu before meh wtf.

[–]ha1fhumanbo liao troll 1 point  

Here's an alternative:

Instead of saying he's your ex-BF, try saying he's just another friend. The police will probably treat it like any other case.

[–]jlonsoChili Crab Nachos 1 point  

An ex-lover stalker vs an ex-friend stalker is actually very different

[–]thr0w4g4y 1 point  

Yup. Wouldn't do me any good to conceal who my stalker really was to me; it's not like he wouldn't reveal it to the police from his side. It took a while for the pattern of stalking to be established (where I had to document every bit of evidence) and for the police to finally realize this guy was for real. I'm glad to say things are under control for now.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[–]thr0w4g4y 3 points  

If you've been called up to have your statement taken before, you'd be aware that the investigation officer usually comes prepared with a set of questions that may correspond to some of the claims made by the other party.

Fair enough, but in my case, that we had sexual relations or not was completely irrelevant. I reiterated that my case was all along a harassment case that was about events since our breakup leading up till then, not about shit that happened during our relationship. But the officer insisted that I be honest with him, reason being I "have to respond directly to my stalker's claim."

Okay lor, so I asked the officer to repeat his question. The question was not phrased to directly ask me if I had sexual relations with my stalker; it was phrased to ask me what do you have to say to that (claim). So I told the officer, "All I have to say is no comment because it is not relevant. Just write that down."

Finally he relented. It almost seemed like he was just following SOP by telling me to be honest, but I wish police officers had more training in dealing with such delicate situations. Then again I had another IO who dozed off while listening to me recite my case details and woke up only after I coughed (after which he said "sorry, 48-hour shift, let's carry on")...

I've gone through so many LEOs that I've come to realize that whether your case gets taken seriously is a hit-and-miss; you've just gotta stand your ground.

P.S. On hindsight, I've come to learn this is nothing but a tactic used by my stalker to slow down investigation -- claim bullshit and divert attention.

 
 
 

[–]Potatomatorange -1 points  

Well to be fair, the police officer is just doing his job, it is after all the law

 
 
 
 
 

[–]MateenLOLHelden sterben nicht! 1 point  

ex-boyfriend-turned-stalker.

I remembered a friend sharing a facebook post by this guy talking about his ex turned stalker with videos of the stalker following the guy.

If it's you, I hope youre safe now.

 
 
 

[–]Reddit-Loves-Me 1 point  

OMG?! Did he press charges under 377A?

I believe the law should take the first step. Non smoking areas. Drinking in public after 10:30. Chewing gums. NS. Many people aren't ready for all these too.

[–]thr0w4g4y 5 points  

This was almost a year ago I think. For me to speak with you guys here now I think I'm fine. I hate to hijack the thread here with my anecdotes but I feel people should hear from the affected community how 377A plays a part in their lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aedile1234 Newbie

aedile1234

Posted
Posted

I hope one day they will actually charge someone with 377A. Then we can stop pretending the law isn't just some symbol of "societal values", but simply represents discrimination and inequality against a minority.

 

But they won't, because then the government and society has nothing to hide behind. So don't be afraid to say you had sexual relations with another man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
superflawless Community Regular

superflawless

Posted
Posted

Anecdotal arguments against equal rights are interesting but they seldom tell the whole story. If you don't believe 377A should be removed and repealed, then enjoy the current situation. There are plenty of us out here in Singapore who do not agree with the law that openly discriminates against a minority. It is our fight and if you want to join in, then please, step aside and don't get in the way. I gave no patience for self-hating gays who do not want to fight for equal rights. We don't want special privileges; we want to treated equally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yoyo74 Community Regular

yoyo74

Posted
Posted

Its because of this section 377A that cause many gays to get confuse and pron to black mail even though the government only want the law to stay but not use it. I believe those high security government jobs will think twice hiring a gay cause pron to black mail. Some of those high security jobs have many questions to ask including how many times you drink alcohol, do you go to any club and which club?, do you go to sauna and which sauna etc. The mere mention of club and sauna already tell tale sign that they want to know if you are gay or not. I feel this section 377A will cause us some of our jobs opportunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
superflawless Community Regular

superflawless

Posted
Posted

I haven't heard of anyone being blackmailed in Singapore but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Certainly gays have been discriminated against in the work place.  Everyone is different and there are definitely many problems associated with the existence of 377. The fact remains: it is a criminal act to engage in same sex sexual contact in Singapore. Yes, even in the privacy of your own home. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yoyo74 Community Regular

yoyo74

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, superflawless said:

I haven't heard of anyone being blackmailed in Singapore but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Certainly gays have been discriminated against in the work place.  Everyone is different and there are definitely many problems associated with the existence of 377. The fact remains: it is a criminal act to engage in same sex sexual contact in Singapore. Yes, even in the privacy of your own home. 

We most probably wont know if any gay is being black mail as most gay dont dare to say it out due to this section 377A law. Even if a gay dare to say it out and report police, the media that always like to paint a bad picture of gays most probably wont show on tv news or newspaper as they wont want people to feel sympathetic towards gays as homophobic people will say its promoting gay agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest 啊真的？

Guest 啊真的？

Posted
Posted

Christians love to throw around the phrase gay agenda alot, it has become so sticky, gays should also try to turn the phrase "christian agenda" into a thing or meme and let it stick around more. How? But talking about it whenever opportunities arise. Why? Because they need to be exposed! Simple.

 

For example: christians love to build schools, hospitals, old folks homes, engage in charity acts like setting up thrift stores, halfway houses and rehab centres for marginalised groups.

 

What about exposing their agenda for doing so? Do they really help everyone without discrimination, non-christians and gays included, or are they required to turn christian and renounce their sexual orientation before they will be accepted and helped by these organisations?

 

These will reflect their "christian agenda" for setting up these charity organisations already. They are doing these not out of grace and real kindness to help the marginalised. But instead, they are doing these to spread their christian faith and to gain a stronger foothold in society at the expense of people - both gay and straight, but especially gays - and other religions that are more genuine.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Avatar

Guest Avatar

Posted
Posted

Lawrence khong's adherence to the "seven mountains theology" masterplan to conquer the "seven secular mountains" in singapore is a testament of this agenda. Yes, he is on a mission given to him by Dr Peter C Wagner, the guy behind the "spiritual warfare" masterplan, who is also the one who commissioned lawrence khong as an "apostle".

http://www.psa91.com/dominion01.htm

 

They even made this into a powerful powerpoint presentation.

http://www.psa91.com/resource/sevenmoumtains.pdf

"The Pastors in Singapore is pursuing to conquer the seven mountains and it appears to be a genuine and sincere attempt to make Singapore a Christian country. Their evangelism with confinement to the mountain of religion has not worked as well and they reckoned the key strategy being involvement by Christianity to take over all the secular spaces and mountains. The issue of homosexuality is a red herring and an excuse to be used. According to their narrow world view, if they do not act, gays would take over the other kingdoms - and that is why they are against the Government giving employment to gays or to decriminalise persecution against gays. Their cause of advancing the Gospel appears commendable, but the methods used are of the world, and using gays as the scapegoat lacks integrity and is a false witness. Jesus was the sacrificial lamb, not gays, and His Kingdom was a heavenly kingdom and not an earthly kingdom. God doesn't want to rule over the mountains of a carnal world, He wants the place deep in our hearts, deep within ourselves, the place of honor and worship, the place of friendship, servanthood, and sonship, and a heart of humility and of Love, Grace, Mercy and Compassion, to continue His ministry on earth. 

Jesus had nothing, whilst we want everything even other people's mountains, and this is sin and envy that will one day bring down the reformation. He conquered the world not by imposing His power, but He conquered it through Agape Love and sacrifice. Let us Love that we may be called the Sons of God."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Buah Loong Loong

Guest Buah Loong Loong

Posted
Posted

Lee Hsien Loong, being lawrence khong and nina khong's jc classmate, i suspect has long been recruited into aiding - or at least made to promise not to get in their way - the realisation of this "seven secular mountain conquering" christian agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Guest locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...