please read this, on aware's recent hollowing out of its old exco members by new members. Here.
for a summary of the events, we-are-aware provides details.
i'm not about to write an editorial but this is only what i feel based on what i've read. i'll just say that this whole thing is so full of nonsense that its almost amazing that something like this happened. Josie Lau, the newly appointed president of aware, had this to say in a recent interview with channel newsasia,
Josie Lau: Aware is a secular organisation. We're not there to push our
personal beliefs or personal religious affiliations. We are all an
inclusive... we don't discriminate people of any race, religion, or,
you know, whether you're a man or woman coming in.
Josie Lau continuing: Now, talking about sexual discrimination, it is
going to be a very controversial topic. and the new exco will have to
take a look at this and see what is the direction we want to take. We
haven't even had a chance to discuss individual ideas yet. Just give us
a chance....
if aware has been known to champion women's causes regardless of race, religion and sexuality, it is obvious that as a president of aware she is expected to continue this work. because that is exactly what aware is built on and that's exactly what people know aware for. hence its very telling if she has to contemplate the direction they want to take regarding this issue. i don't see why there should be a spectre of doubt in her mind when aware's stance as determined by its previous committee is already out there, if she intends to continue aware's previous work.
honestly, what are the chances of 5 out of 11 exco members going to
the same church and not knowing each other before the exco
appointments? given that the church is a small community, and which strongly disapproves of homosexuals. who is actually going to buy that story.
bringing thio su mien into aware by the new exco was a little bit too telling. given that she's practically infamous for her how outspoken she is on her anti-homosexuality views. if they're known for such views, how can the public sit back and watch as christian fundamentalists who make up a huge part of the exco, take over a secular society involved in schools and the public at large, by first replacing their exco almost wholesale, not coming clean about how they were appointed, or stumbling over their viewpoints on sexuality as spokespeople for aware. how can they expect people not to suspect them of having religious agenda when everything points exactly to that.
her interview on channel newsasia, personally, i found unwatchable, mainly because she
wasn't convincingly eloquent, and their comments weak. which really is too bad for her because
people judge and they aren't likely to be forgiving about it, in the
face of an event such as this.
i obviously don't like this because of how tied up they are to their religious beliefs, and their plain disrespect of the rights of people, but more than that i dislike how they took over aware by making use of some loopholes. i found it disgusting and distasteful because of the way they manipulated the situation, and then denying ever doing so. although this is also largely the fault of aware for not changing their voting policy fast enough to prevent such a takeover from happening. and this is the unfortunate result.
at the same time, however, the new exco is being very sneaky and it is true that if they have nothing to hide, why takeover aware in this manner? rather than prove themselves slowly to aware and to the public that they are worthy of being in decision-making positions within the group? this isn't about homosexuality issues in our society more than it is about the possibility of our secular space being violated. and what more by making use of a far-reaching group such as aware.
i don't want to see the day their religious propaganda gets wrapped up and labeled 'secular' in aware's objectives and movements. because if we had to wait until then to stop them, it might possibly be too late. and how might we prove it anyway? which is exactly why they shouldn't be allowed a chance to prove themselves in their new positions. don't expect the public to trust you with this power when you aren't trying to gain this trust in the first place.