The Deluge

First up, this site wishes to express its condolences to the families and friends of all the Singaporeans who were killed by the Tsunamis on Sunday morning- and indeed, to the families and friends of the many, many people who were killed.

Needless to say, the Boxing Day Tsunami has been horrifyingly deadly. Not since an earthquake struck Tangshan, China in 1976 have so many people been killed in a single natural disaster. And not in living memory has a single natural disaster affected people on such a huge geographical scale- with 11 countries suffering physical damage, and many more nations in mourning over the loss of hundreds, if not thousands of their citizens.

With all due respect to the dead, however, I believe that the developed world's attention to this disaster would not have been so prompt, had it not been for the fact that so many of its holidaymakers were among the fatalities. Had it not hit popular tourist resorts in Thailand, the Maldives and Sri Lanka, the reaction of most media viewers in the developed world would have been to merely stare in gruesome fascination at the flattened shacks and scattered debris on their television screens (or newspapers, for the still literate) before flipping the channel. Indeed, as The Economist has already soberly noted,

"Such selfish distortions are regrettable in theory—who noticed while millions were dying in Congo's wars?—but in practice they might as well be exploited. It ought to be possible to raise far more in charitable donations from individuals and organisations in rich countries for relieving this disaster than for single-country earthquakes or floods, for example. "

It can also work the other way round. To take a simple example, the English Premiership clubs, who incidentally have a fanatical following in South East Asia, have so far pledged a million British pounds in Tsunami assistance. Peanuts, admittedly, if you compare it to amount of money paid each year to say, a Wayne Rooney. But better than their past record of well...not much.

The disaster, while showing the world community at some of its best gallantary this year, has I think shown one particular government at its worst. 90 or so people have been estimated to have died in Myanmar. However, its paranoid and totalitarian government has elected to deny virtually all media coverage of the event in that country!

And this remarkable piece of news from our very own Straits Times too.

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/sub/storyprintfriendly/0,5578,293248,00.html?

Dec 31, 2004
Myanmar people get little news about tragedy
Military regime says 17 villages wiped out and 34 killed, but aid agencies say 90 people have died

By Lee Kim Chew

AS THE death toll in Asian countries hit by the tsunamis continues to mount, little is known about the fate of people in the Irrawaddy delta and Tenasserim region, Myanmar's coastal areas swamped by Sunday's killer waves.

According to the New Light of Myanmar newspaper, the military regime's mouthpiece, 17 villages were destroyed, 200 people made homeless, 34 killed, 45 injured and 25 missing.

Its Minister for Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement, Major-General Sein Htwa, visited the afflicted southern coastal areas on Tuesday.

But, apart from brief reports of the tsunamis in the official media, Myanmar people have received scarcely any news about the staggering tragedy that has hit their neighbours.

Much of the updates about Myanmar's casualties came instead from aid agencies Unicef and the Red Cross in Yangon, which put the death toll at 90.

Yangon's junta does not allow any reporting of natural calamities. Last July, floods in Kachin state killed 50 people. The person who filmed the floods was arrested, said a source.

In May, a cyclone hit Arakan state, the worst in 40 years. Some 220 people were killed and 1,400 others were made homeless. The regime kept things under wraps for two weeks before finally appealing for international aid.

In this light, Myanmar's casualties from Sunday's tsunami could be worse than reported officially, a source told The Straits Times.

Thus far, there is nothing in Yangon to suggest that Myanmar's coastal population suffered massive casualties. Few in Yangon are talking about it because the capital itself is unscathed.

The regime's top leaders have sent messages of sympathy to the countries badly affected by the tragedy and have not appealed for international aid.

In Bangkok yesterday, seismologists said they recorded two earthquakes in Myanmar in the morning, but neither would spark a tidal wave. They said one measured 5.4 on the Richter scale and a second was of 5.6 magnitude, Agence France-Presse reported.

An official said no tsunami warning was issued because the quakes happened far inland.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How is it possible to even work with a regime that even denies the truth of a disaster caused by nature?

Anyway, I've come to the important part of this message. Namely, how to help.


Send your donations to:

Singapore Red Cross Society
Address your cheque to Singapore Red Cross Society.
Indicate behind the cheque "Tidal Waves Asia".

Include name, address and telephone number at the back of the cheque as a receipt will be sent to you.

Post the cheque to:
Singapore Red Cross
Red Cross House
15 Penang Lane
Singapore 238486

[Alternatively, you could just pop down to the building and make a cash donation- which was precisely what I did this morning]

---

Indian Red Cross Society
National Head Quarters
Red Cross Building
1 Red Cross Road
110001 New Delhi
(write “Tsunami victims” at the back of cheque)

---

Relief Bureau
Thai Red Cross Society
1871 Henry Dunant Road
Patumwan,
Bangkok 10330.

---

Indonesian Red Cross Society
Jl. Jenderal Datot Subroto Kav. 96
12790 Jakarta
(TT - a/c 450.666.0009
account name Kantor Pusat Palang Merah Indonesia Bank BCA Menara Bidakara Jakarta)

---

Malaysian Red Crescent Society
JKR 32, Jalan Nipah
Off Jalan Ampang
55000 Kuala Lumpur
(Write “MRCS Relief Fund” + name and address of donor at the back of cheque)

---

The Sri Lankan Red Cross Society
307,2/1 T.B. Jayah Mawatha
Colombo 10
(Telegraphic transfer:
Acc of Suduwella Branch
01 431620044617
People’s Bank)

---

Myanmar Red Cross Society
Red Cross Building
42 Strand Road
Yangon
(write “Tsunami victims” at the back of cheque)

Hear Hear.

A brilliant rejoinder by Caleb...


Firstly, how did this bitch gain tenure at NUS law fac? This woman should not be teaching law. Pottery perhaps, or table etiquette, but not law. Her conception of law seems to predate HLA Hart and is disturbingly monistic and "utilitarian" in a what-is-good-for-ME-is-good-for-everybody-therefore-this-should-be-made-law way.

Secondly, her argument is totally absurd:

>The police noted in their press statement that they had noticed
>same-sex couples 'openly kissing and intimately touching each
>other' during other Fridae.com-organised events.

Well yes but as far as I am aware (though I must admit I am not much aware of S'popo law -- I just found out today that all land in S'popo is owned by the state in a weird neo-feudal kind of way) same-sex couples are not legally disallowed from 'kissing and intimately touching each other' in private. What is illegal is oral and anal sex (for both hets and gays) and gay PDAs. Though these couples 'openly' conducted their activities according to the police report, the fact that it was during a Fridae event means it was not open (public) at all but private. There is therefore no basis in law (the basis on which the police are supposed to operate) to ban the Fridae party on this count.

>Furthermore, they noted that the use
>by patrons of toilets meant for the opposite sex suggested
>most patrons were 'probably gays or lesbians and that the
>event was almost exclusively for them'.

This is wrong in so many ways. Most gays use male toilets and most lesbians use female toilets. It is only transsexuals who use the toilets of their assumed gender. This gem of a turd produced by the police has no implications for the sexual orientation of patrons, only on their perceived gender identities. But of course, in this vale of misinformation and obstinacy, ppl still insist on confusing homosexuality with transgender issues.

More brainlessly, the argument is incoherent. If they said that 'almost all' of even 'most' patrons used toilets meant for the opposite sex, then they would have been logically consistent (though not factually correct) in saying that most of the patrons were homosexual and that the event was gay-targeted. BUT their point here is that an unspecified but probably insignificant number of patrons used toilets meant for the opposite sex therefore 'most' patrons were probably homo and that the event was meant 'almost exclusively' for them. This is the most faulty logic I have ever read since attending a David Liew lecture.

Most brainlessly, considering that Fridae is a gay and lesbian website, the fact that the events it organises attract and are meant for homosexuals is not exactly surprising. Were I to attend a meeting of the Legion of Mary, I would really not be like 'Oh my God, that woman is clutching a rosary and saying a Hail Mary. How odd!!! I thought she would be reading a tract by Zwingli and Calvin and calling the Pope the Antichrist!!' No really I wouldn't.

>As Straits Times Senior Writer Andy Ho noted recently: 'It is
>homosexuals who engaged in condomless anopenetrative sex
>that are culpable of spreading HIV in Singapore', causing
>the 'second wave of HIV here and worldwide'.

I know he is *Senior Writer* but that does not mean he is an authority. So how does quoting him establish anything? (Might I suggest the ST invent a new post of Writer Mentor? This would surely lend greater weight to its pronouncements.) And "anopenetrative" is a very ugly word. Written by a very ugly Senior Writer.

>To facilitate or allow such activities to carry on unchecked would
>constitute a gross breach of the public trust and be highly
>irresponsible. The Aids problem cannot be ignored.
>
>Blatant flaunting of homosexual activities is offensive to the
>conservative mainstream which wants to see enduring standards
>of public decency and morality upheld - it would be regressive
>to allow this to degenerate.

Once again the the-public-good-is-MY-good mentality surfaces. I do not agree with the conservative argument that certain restraints such as censorship must be imposed so that public morality is upheld. But it is a respectable argument (for example, if there were a spectacle in which a perfectly consenting Christian martyr is torn apart by lions in an arena while watched by baying crowds, the govt would not be unjustified in stepping in to stop it, even though the martyr may be consenting and even glory in her public mauling. That is because apart from the evil of her death there is also the evil that the crowd becomes depraved in watching this spectacle.) However, this argument is clearly inapplicable here. For Fridae did not publicise this event on national tv, complete with images of gays performing unmentionable anopenetrative acts. I assure you that the conservative 'mainstream' was not aware of the very existence of this event. 'Public morality' cannot be depraved when the public is not aware of this event. And even if the public were aware, there is no consensus that this awareness would lead to them being depraved.

Furthermore, since the majority of ppl are het and as the writer asserts, 'conservative', even if they bought tickets and went, they would not be depraved and have their impeccable standards of morality lowered. They would either be indifferent or disgusted and they would certainly not join in the fun. As conservatives who are so 'offended' they would hardly participate in such a -- private -- function and as hets they would not join in the fun as to them it would not be fun. Her argument that allowing gay parties depraves public morals is therefore deeply flawed. If she had been against showing graphic gay sex on tv should might have had more of a case.

Also...

She is so utterly wrong. To criminalise and suppress homosexual sex would be to exacerbate the Aids problem. Since, as she seems to concede, gay men and women exist, then it should follow that they have sex -- gay sex. If we were to publicly discuss gay sex, then young gay men might be better educated as to the dangers of barebacking and be more likely to use condoms. They would not, as some of them currently are, be misled by shitheads within the gay community who think that barebacking is fun and not that unsafe.

Her policy is wrong, both on grounds of legal principle and in terms of its practical effect. She should shut up soon, retire, and spend her days reading Hans Kung, Rowan Williams and Home & Garden.

- Caleb.

More Homophobia!

Contributed by Gabriel

In the ST....

Dec 17, 2004
Police did right in rejecting gay party

THE decision of the police not to give a licence for the Christmas 'gay party' planned by Fridae.com ('It's no go for planned Christmas 'gay party' '; ST, Dec 9), as this undermines the public interest, is to be strongly commended.

Given the alarming Aids epidemic Singapore is facing, any event which would threaten to aggravate this problem and endanger the public health cannot be allowed.

The police noted in their press statement that they had noticed same-sex couples 'openly kissing and intimately touching each other' during other Fridae.com-organised events. Furthermore, they noted that the use by patrons of toilets meant for the opposite sex suggested most patrons were 'probably gays or lesbians and that the event was almost exclusively for them'.

As Straits Times Senior Writer Andy Ho noted recently: 'It is homosexuals who engaged in condomless anopenetrative sex that are culpable of spreading HIV in Singapore', causing the 'second wave of HIV here and worldwide'.

To facilitate or allow such activities to carry on unchecked would constitute a gross breach of the public trust and be highly irresponsible. The Aids problem cannot be ignored.

Blatant flaunting of homosexual activities is offensive to the conservative mainstream which wants to see enduring standards of public decency and morality upheld - it would be regressive to allow this to degenerate.

It is heartening to read that the police authorities will be scrutinising applications for similar future events with an eye to protecting the health of our nation and our social well-being. Such vigilance warrants the nation's gratitude and thanks.

Thio Su Mien (Dr)

The Moral Majority strikes again. This is just begging for parody.


July 17, 1964
Police did right in rejecting religious procession

THE decision of the police not to give a license for the religious 'procession to commemorate the Prophet Mohammad's birthday' planned by the Muslim society ('It's no go for planned religious 'procession'; ST, Jul 9), as this undermines the public interest, is to be strongly commended.

Given the alarming religious and racial tension Singapore is facing, any event which would threaten to aggravate this problem and endanger public safety cannot be allowed.

The police noted in their press statement that they had noticed Muslim men 'touching their foreheads to mosque floors' during other events organised by the Muslim community. Furthermore, they noted that the use of mosques exclusively by men suggested that women were 'discriminated against by Islam and that the event was almost exclusively for them [men]'.

As Straits Times Senior Writer Bob Tan noted recently: 'It is Muslims who engage in global Jihad, suicide bombings and running amok with parangs, that are culpable of wrecking the fragile peace we have in our fait city', causing 'the populace to live in fear'.

To facilitate or allow such activities to carry on unchecked would constitute a gross breach of the public trust and be highly irresponsible. The religious problem cannot be ignored.

Blatant flaunting of muslim activities is offensive to the conservative mainstream which is intolerant of other races and religions, and uses this secret intolerance as an excuse to uphold 'public standards of decency and morality' - it would be regressive to allow this to degenerate.

It is heartening to read that the police authorities will be scrutinising applications for similar future events with an eye to protecting the health of our nation and our social well-being. Such vigilance warrants the nation's gratitude and thanks.

George Lim


I trust all right-minded people will find the above parody offensive, bigoted, wrong-headed, intolerant and inflammatory.

They may then proceed to consider just how homophobia is different from religiophobia, or otherwise, as the case might be.

Quite right Gabriel.

I will, for one state my strong diagreement with Dr Thio's point of view now.

It is in fact, not inaccurate to say that there is a problem with the spread of AIDS amoung gays who are sexually promiscuous in Singapore. But then again the spread of AIDS is also a problem among males who pick up whores from Geylang, Orchard Towers, Joo Chiat, Batam, Haatyai etc. So if AIDS prevention is really the issue, the social conservative should also push for a complete ban on prostitution in Singapore, and to rigourously conduct HIV tests on all incoming males returning from suspect locations.

Of course this isn't being seriously suggested, for the simple fact that the authorities are aware of the greater evil of underground and wholly unregulated whoredom; it just leads to a greater likelihood of risky behaviour. The same principle would apply for Gay parties- they will happen, despite attempts at bans and crackdowns. Indeed, I would think that orgies are more likely to happen within an illegal party held within a private home than say, a nightclub in Singapore (since our vigilant Men In Blue conduct regular spot-checks to deter excessive behaviour anyway).

So what is the real concern? This is the revealing passage:

Blatant flaunting of homosexual activities is offensive to the

conservative mainstream which wants to see enduring standards of

public decency and morality upheld - it would be regressive to allow

this to degenerate.

Ah. So it's simply because we're uncomfortable with seeing two men (or two women) being intimate with each other. Even if it is a closed door event, apparently the fact that we're aware that these things are actually going on in Singapore is enough to fill us with moral dread and drear. Well, so does the thought of Chee Ko Peks roaming round the islands of Riau province, Indonesia seeking underaged teenagers to exploit and deflower.

Please don't talk about "standards of public decency and morality" in Singapore when the average heartlander apparently thinks that the latter situation I described above is acceptable. Yet people like Dr Thio seem to think that eradicating the rights of homosexuals to have a little fun are a higher priority in protecting "family values" and "morality" than truly corrosive threats to the family and marriage in Singapore. Things like the wanton overspending and unrealistic expectations prevalent among young married couples, child and spousal abuse, as well as, of course the casual sex practiced by many Singapore males which puts so many of their wives and children at risk.

It's a placebo effect at work, really; you take action which makes you feel good while utterly failing to resolve the problem you are so apparently concerned about.

The FAQ has been edited and updated, thanks to Pei En, who helped to point out a typographical error this past Thursday.

To All Members

If you are reading this, well done! You have bothered to click on the link that was emailed to you to view our new home on the web! Exciting times for the Young Republic ahead!

The purpose of this website is twofold:

1- To introduce new topics for discussion on the Mailing List.

2- To feature the more interesting essays, whether it be comments a couple of hundred words, or Lisheng-Thesis™ essays, that have come up during the discussions on the mailing list.

3- To promote the discussion group.

The website will complement the existing mailing list, which will remain our main talking shop, so do not despair!

If there are any members who do not wish their comments to appear on this site, ever, or would only be agreeable on the condition that they be anonymous, please inform me at

kohfamey@pacific.net.sg

The new page for the Young Republic Mailing List