Yeah… Exams over, had been itching to blog about AWARE and Mingyi’s case. And now there’s a new kid on the block known as swine flu. The newspaper, bloggers etc are having a field day with much news worthy issues to write about.

In my last post, I mentioned that we have to look at the actions of Josie Lau (JL), Feminist Mentor Thio (FM Thio) rather than listen to their words to understand the saga better. And I did point out that JL adopted a ‘knower’s stance instead of a ‘learner’ stance before FM Thio declared that it was a coordinated takeover effort masterminded by her. So here’s my few cents worth presented in a tongue in cheek MCQ style. (Perhaps I can write a facebook quiz base on this)

Question 1.
You discover that AWARE had a neutral stance towards homosexuality in their sex education program. It violates your religious believes, what should you do?

a) Live and let live. It is not my problem as long as I can choose not to go for their version of sex education.

b) Write to MOE/AWARE/Schools to engage them in a civil minded dialogue about it, explaining my concerns and giving constructive feedback

c) Form my own non-governmental organization with a few like-minded friends to offer an alternative to the AWARE sex education program. Come out with a better program so schools will choose my program instead of AWARE’s

d) Get a group of my sisters to formally take over control of AWARE so we can make sure that AWARE will be refocus it to what I believe is right for you, for Singapore, for everyone in the observable universe.

If you choose
a – You have the ‘bochup’ attitude. It is dangerous if one shows constant apathy but at least you don’t create problems for others.
b- You are the ‘complain’ kind. You strongly believe that you can change the world if you draw their attention to the problems you spotted. You may not be Ms Popular but the world truly needs people like you to improve
c- You prefer to let your own action speak louder than your words. If others are not doing it properly, you feel compelled to make sure that it is done properly. And you do it fairly.
d- It’s your way or highway. You don’t tolerate alternative views. Why do so when it is ‘obvious’ that all these alternative views are wrong! You won’t let alternative views exist when you are around.

FM Thio, JL and Co’s answer - d

Question 2.
You have successfully taken over AWARE via the AGM. Now you have the chance to right all the wrongs and direct this organization to where it should be. What should you do now?

i. Express my views and concerns over the sex education from AWARE and engage members in discussion over the differences to make the change.

ii. Ignore the old guard and views of other members. Leave them out of the meetings, isolate them and make them all quit and leave the committees so no one will oppose to the changes that I will be making to AWARE

iii. Do not renew CEDAW and other sub-committee head’s tenure despite their experience and despite that CEDAW most of those other sub-committees did not implement the sex education. Replace them with new EXCO member who are new to AWARE and loyal to me. Fire all the workers who refuse to obey me. Remember, it’s my way or highway. Oh, remember to change the locks so unauthorized visitors cannot come in.

a) i only b) ii only c) iii only d) ii & iii

If you choose a) EQ150. If you choose b) EQ90. If you choose c) EQ70. If you choose d), EQ10
FM Thio, JL and Co’s answer – d

Question 3.
The old guard is fighting back because of your lack of tack and suspicious actions after taking over AWARE. They want to know what you have in store for them in AWARE. What should you do?

a) I will identify a few key areas that I will want to work on, including the homosexuality issue and I will consult all my advisors, including the old guard, on this issue before making my decision on the future plans for AWARE. I will organize open forum/discussion to engage all parties and re-affirm AWARE’s founding principles or non-discrimination (including gays)

b) Keep quiet about my plans and give general comments that I will work hard to improve women’s rights etc. Give TV interviews but refuse to do it with the old guard. Try to buy sympathy votes by portraying myself as the victim.

c) Blame the old guard for being pro-gay and forcing us to come in. Blame the old guards that they are too diversify and need to focus on their energies to pressing issues. Blame the old guards that they are too focus on pro-gay movement. Blame them for showing lesbian movies. Doesn’t matter if what I blame seems incoherent, as long as I point the blame elsewhere. I can’t be wrong.

d) I will do b) and c) and at the same time rally all my comrades from my religious background to stand behind me to make the change that we all believe in. Even if it meant that some of my comrades may resort to verbal abuse, character assassination and other destructive means to support me. (There was a false and vicious rumour spreading among some Christian sites that Constance Singam was pro-gay because she had a gay brother)

If you choose
a) You are a true leader who will inspire others to follow you with confidence and trust.

b) You lead by faith, your followers stand behind you because they are your friends/relatives/acquaintance.

c) You lead by fear, by making others look bad, by making the future look bleak, you try to get people to support you because you are the only ray of hope for them.

d) Sith lords, Hitler, Kim Jong II. Those who follow you think that you are the GREAT LEADER, those who don’t follow you are mightily wrong.

FM Thio, JL and Co’s answer - d
---------------------------------------------
Yes, I think that the new committee had 3 chances to prove themselves worthy but in my opinion, they made the wrong choices in all 3 chances. The vote of no confidence for the new committee seems appropriate and there is nothing wrong, legally, for the old guard to challenge the new guard in EOGM as it written within their constitution. JL and co may be voted in legally but they were not voted in fairly. That is because there were a overwhelming majority of the voters who support JL and co because of their religious links. In AGM for NGO, it is not compulsory for all voting members to be present in the AGM or EOGM to vote, unlike Singapore election. As long as the turnout is more than a certain number as required in the constitution, the AGM/EOGM can proceed. Therefore JL may have been able to take control by getting a large turnout from minority members. So what is perfectly legal may not be morally upright. Similarly, what is morally upright, may not be legal at all.

The old guards actions were honourable. They did not resort to any of those ‘dirty’ actions taken by the new guard despite the new guard’s action against them. They took steps to organize themselves, setup online petition, write in for EOGM, and reach out to the masses by supporting facts and achievements they have made over the 25 years. When faced with problems, their actions won over my respect for them.
--------------------------------------------
Now at this juncture, I have 1 more question for FM Thio, JL and co. Faced with an EOGM, what should they do now?

a) Recruit more religious members to support them and retain control at all costs

b) Pillage, slash and burn tactics. Make sure maximum damage is done to AWARE before the old guard takes over

c) Step down and take responsibility for the fiasco

d) Diplomacy – negotiate with the old guard to come to an agreement of sorts

What will be their answer? This may be the final chapter of the saga or it can be the beginning of another one. As what our minister Dr Vivian Balakrishnan has said

1. it is wise to keep religion out of politics in Singapore (which FM Thio and co brought it in)

2. Do not let one issue hijack the agenda and polarize Singapore (which FM Thio and co tried very hard to do it by bringing up the gay issue to polarize Singapore. The old guard did bring up issue of lack of communication/distrust of the new guard but that will hardly polarize Singapore)

3. A rainbow coalition is vital for any group here to make changes (which the old guard is one of different race and religious background but the new guard is predominantly Chinese Christians from the same church)