The Fuss About AWARE

The inordinate attention given to AWARE in the national media in Singapore over the last few months was a reflection that in a country where things are usually very orderly and controlled, a saga of this scale is rarely seen. Josie Lau and her friends from the same Christian church executed a coup d’état against the leadership of the influential women’s group, when they rallied like-minded woman to join the organization a few months before, and organized enough of them to turn up at the AGM kick out the old leadership. Thio Su Mien, the ex-dean of the Law Faculty in NUS, freely admitted to being the mentor that orchestrated the effort. Given that they were all members of the same church, there was talk that the Christian right had taken over the leadership of an errant secular group to “set it straight”. Josie said that the old guard had turned AWARE into a single issue group promoting lesbianism.

In a heated and highly charged EOGM on the 2nd of May 2009 that followed two months later, the tables were turned. Josie and her supporters were outnumbered by supporters of the old guard. In a series of speeches, Josie, her committee and her mentor were denounced and ridiculed. For hours, people came forward to voice their opposition to her leadership. Caught on the defensive, Josie and her committee decided that their position was no longer tenable, and resigned.

What is the fuss all about and what is really at stake?

The first question is whether it was right for Josie and her supporters to execute a power grab in the way that they did. I think the answer to this one is no. While everything they did was consistent with the constitution, their action raised many moral issues. Did Josie really believe that she had the moral authority to lead a woman’s umbrella group having come to power is such a divisive way? The open criticism of the old guard, the changing of the locks, the sacking of a 15 year employee, the failure to invite the treasurer from the old committee to an AWARE press conference only added to the divisions. These were all missteps a more seasoned leader would have avoided. A new leader must always unite members and firm up her support base - not divide people further after an election. Even though Josie was passionate about her cause, she must know that organizations cannot be changed overnight. Her actions simply spurred the old guard, caught unprepared at the AGM, to strike back. Josie spent two months defending her position, spending $90000 of AWARE’s funds, and still ended up losing her position.

The second question is a moral question. Should AWARE be involved in lesbian causes at all? I believe that most Singaporeans are actually on Josie’s side. If we took a straw poll of Singaporeans, the answer would most certainly be a resounding no. Heartland Singapore is socially conservative and were shocked to learn about AWARE’s activities in this area. The reaction is of course very different from white collared-intellectual, English speaking Singaporeans who are more liberal and whose opinions dominate AWARE. They believe that it is wrong to ignore the issue and wish it away. While I share this, I think the group needs to exercise some prudence in putting this message across. Nevertheless, one good outcome of this saga is that the new AWARE leadership is now more aware of how sensitive this issue is, religious or otherwise, to many Singaporeans.

The third question is whether groups should bring their religious agenda into secular, umbrella organizations. I think the answer to this is a resounding no. For all the explanations that Josie and her team attempted following the event, it rang hollow once it was revealed that a disproportionate number of her new committee members were from the same church. It did not help that the Pastor from her church unwisely rallied support for Josie from his church members from the pulpit, thus confirming people's fears that there was a religious agenda behind this. If Josie had been a wise leader, she would have immediately appealed for greater diversity in the committee. In multi racial, multi religious Singapore, even the hint of a suggestion that a secular umbrella organization is dominated by a single religious movement, with a single view, is totally unacceptable. There must be tolerance for other viewpoints. I know Josie feels that it is her moral obligation and her calling as a Christian to correct the wrongs of AWARE. But surely she too can understand that Singapore will be a worse place if her actions prompted other faith groups to promote their causes by doing exactly the same thing.

Postscript: In just the week following this blog, the Ministry of Education suspended all sex education in school subject to a review given concerns over AWARE's promotion of lesbianism as "normal" (which they regard as is, and the majority of Singaporeans regard as not). The Pastor of the Church of Our Saviour apologise for speaking on the AWARE saga from the pulpit. And the letters to the forum keep pouring in.