By:Alex Au news@newstoday.com.sg

THE Registrar of Societies has again refused to register People Like Us, as it did seven years ago. Despite the claims of freeing up civil space, setting defaults at "Yes" rather than "No" and encouraging Singaporeans to follow their passion, it is clear that in the matter of sexual orientation, the Government wants to keep Singapore insulated from the world.

In most other policy areas, the message is the opposite: As a small country, we cannot ignore the external environment. We must keep abreast of trends and stay plugged in and competitive.

This is the argument made for keeping income taxes down and raising GST: Our taxation policy must be attractive for foreign investment. And for the reengineering of the aviation industry: We can't wish away budget carriers.

Even outside economics, we use this "external imperative" argument. China is rising, so learn Chinese. We need creative talent for a knowledge economy, so rework the education system.

But when it comes to the question of homosexuality, the reference is domestic. Singaporeans = Asian = conservative. Never mind what's happening beyond our shores, here we cannot.

Another commentary can be written about the illogic of the Asian = conservative equation. But my point is, just as it would be suicidal to ignore external imperatives regarding taxation, aviation, language and education, we are being equally stupid to stay blind and unmoving with respect to homosexuality. There is a shift towards full integration of gay citizens elsewhere, particularly in the leading examples of knowledge economies we want to emulate.

The American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank, reported in their 2003 survey that 59 per cent of Americans wouldn't rule out a gay Presidential candidate, 61 per cent found gay elementary school teachers acceptable and 80 per cent were fine with the idea of gay soldiers. In the US, gay acceptance is not a minority belief, but a majority view.

The British Social Attitudes Survey 2000 found only 47 per cent who tho-ught homosexuality wrong. Of those under 30, only 23 per cent did. The Netherlands, Belgium and Canada now have same-sex marriages. France, Germany and Denmark have civil unions and Britain will soon have it.

Even in the US, with its religious fundamentalists, few think the clock can be turned back. After the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that gays should be permitted to marry, opponents tried to organise a constitutional amendment to overturn the ruling. After some months of debate, the only proposal moving forward is one that defines marriage as one between a man and woman. But at the same time, it mandates gay civil unions. Thus the debate isn't one of allowing or disallowing same-sex unions. It is merely one of semantics — whether or not to call it marriage.

It will soon be normal in the US for same-sex couples to have legal status. How do we attract talent when we remain so backward compared to the way of life they will be used to?

A German gay executive, who had been offered a posting here, emailed me recently asking how he could get a dependent's pass for his partner. He was disappointed that not only was there no such provision, his relationship with his partner would be a crime here. I doubt if he took up the posting.

One may think only a small percentage of professionals are gay and it won't be a significant loss. But why would an investor locate here if one or more of his key executives resist the transfer? Talent can flow the other way too. How many sons and daughters have we lost, and will continue to lose, because they want a freer life elsewhere? Is anybody keeping count?

A friend recently showed me a 1995 photograph of a house party. There were 12 gay men in it. Seven of them have since emigrated. They would rather be doubly a minority in another country (racially and gay) than singly (just gay) here. This tells you how alienated they feel and what a farce our "cosmopolitanism" is.

What is so threatening about a gay and lesbian society that it must be banned? The mission of People Like Us is to educate, inform and debate by conferences, forums, surveys, research and the like. We want to broaden Singapore's inclusiveness, so that our gay sons and daughters stay to realise their potential here.

Our aim is to persuade Singaporeans to move with the times, so that we don't handicap ourselves in the global competition for talent and investment.

Is this too subversive an idea?

Alex Au is a gay activist with People Like Us


                                                      Home