For my final interview, I talked to Mr. Sean Lacey, who is an educator at UWCSEA East and leads the Equality, PinkDot and PAUSE (Parents At UWC Supporting Each other). It was an amazing perspective to have, being someone who has lived in Singapore since 1998 and has lived through the various reforms that the country has faced in the first 1/5 of the 21st century.

This interview was especially interesting to be a part of because Mr. Lacey is someone who is not from Singapore, and is an expat here. Coming from a country like Canada, which is known to be one of the most progressive countries in the world in terms of LGBTQ+ rights and social reform, I was surprised to hear of the conservative religious background in which he grew up. Additionally, I think that this interview was good not just to have some insight from someone who has lived under Section 377A for about 22 years now, but also for someone who has truly observed the ways in which this country has changed in the face of globalisation, and how he believes it will change in the future.

Being an educator himself, I thought it would be of paramount importance to ask him about ways in which he thinks society and the academic community can be educated about the LGBTQ+ here in Singapore, to perhaps create more of a sense of acceptance and understanding around something that many here only seem to take notice of when it is classified as a health problem.

A common trend I noticed, as I came to the conclusion of my engagement experiences with this interview, is that all of the interviewees hope and believe that the change will come from the younger generations. It seems that the wave of globalisation has already taken place in the sense that values of acceptance and cohesion of society among younger generations seems to be present, although they are not yet in the position to make the change that they wish to see. While the older generations of Singapore were credited with reform in terms of economics, it is now up to the younger generation and the next wave of leaders and ministers to lead the way for social reform here in Singapore; this seemed to be a common wish among my interviewees. It seems to be a question of ‘when’ rather than ‘if’, recognising that ultimately it will happen and Singapore will fall into the loop of globalisation that has seen so many first and second world countries repel anti-LGBTQ laws and legalise same-sex marriage among many other things. Singapore seems to be living in its colonial past with the maintenance of penal codes such as 377; however slowly change will occur, it is a commonly held opinion that it will occur no matter what.

My third meeting was with Ms. June Chua, who founded and runs The T-Project, which is a welfare shelter and social service provider for the homeless transgender community.

Surprisingly, the conversation that I had with Ms. Chua made me realise that the government’s attitude towards the LGBTQ+ community is quite different from what one would generally assume to be negative. She told me about the many ways in which the government has supported the opening of her facilities, and how institutions such as IMH have been referring clients to her shelter since 2016. It shows that the government has proactively provided support through regular visits to her shelter; it was hard to get her company registered, but the Minister for Law, Minister K Shanmugam, visited her shelter and helped her get the company officially registered. Additionally, during the COVID pandemic, she has been able to receive funding grants from the government. In their own conservative way, the government has been providing a lot of help, especially recently.

Her main aim is to build bridges between the transgender community, the Singaporean community, and the government; she considers herself to be very pragmatic in the sense that she realises policy change will take too long and is much too confrontational for the kind of work that she wants to be doing which is simply providing a safe space and welfare for the homeless transgender community here in Singapore.

I think the biggest take away from this conversation was that Ms. Chua, like the other organisation representatives I have talked to, hopes and believes that the change will come from the younger generations; she herself said that she hopes us younger generations have “infiltrated” government agencies and are creating a much wider spectrum of varied representation in our government. She hopes that education and representation will be some of the changes that come with this younger representation in government; it is no more a question of if, but when the change will happen.

I think the biggest thing that I have taken away from this conversation is that it is the will of the people, more than it is the government, who will decide the attitude towards LGBTQ+ legislation. As I have learned from my conversations, I have found that the government will truly look to be pragmatic and aim to satisfy the public and this attitude will change with the changing tides of values as a result of the worldwide process of globalization.

My second engagement was with Ms. Zuby Eusofe of The Healing Circle, an organisation that acts as a safe space for queer members of the Muslim community who require assistance in their journey of self-exploration and reconciliation with their spirituality.

She comes from an Islamic background and her mother was a former Quran religious teacher. The biggest thing that I took away from my discussion with Ms. Eusofe, who has extensive knowledge on the teachings of the Quran and the preachings of Islam, is that the true representation of homosexuality in religion (especially Islam) has been lost in translation over the years, as manipulated by clerics and spiritual leaders. The legitimacy of these spiritual leaders in their communities has led to the creation of stigma around the LGBTQ+ community in conservative religious circles, and it has spilled out into general society as well. As she put it herself, “religion is there to reinstate a disciplinary about not having non-consensual sex, but it has nothing to do about not liking someone of the same gender.”

She explained to me how Singapore, being a traditionally conservative state founded on the principles of communitarianism and strict Asian values, has always been resistant to major societal change, something that is very much motivated by the need to maintain the social order for the purpose of maintaining economic growth. In other words, civil rights takes a secondary role to economic development. Additionally, when it comes to these welfare organisations trying to gain legitimacy through official registration as a company in Singapore, they are usually more comfortable  staying as a small, unregistered organisation because registration would mean funding controlled by the government who would have leverage to impose their will on the activities of organisations such as The Healing Circle. Fundings will be directed in terms of quotas, and this will mean that the government will have a say in the kind of people that The Healing Circle will be allowed to help, be it race, sexual orientation, gender, etc. There is still racial motivation in this aspect as well, according to Ms. Eusofe.

I think that the biggest takeaway from this conversation was the idea of representation, be it in the media or by powerful authoritative figures, has really been misconstrued when it comes to the LGBTQ+ community. Clerics have continued to preach anti-LGBTQ rhetoric that, according to Ms. Eusofe, has been manipulated from what the Quran dictates. Not only this, but representation in the media regarding Section 377A-D, where Section 377A happens to be the most reported (criminalising sexual conduct between two men), represents Section 377A-D as being completely about anti-homosexuality, as compared to the penal code really being about sodomy in public, in general; people are quick to assume the negative attitude towards homosexuality as a result of the highlighted importance on the 377A clause by the media.

My first talk was with Elle Llewellyn of the organisation YouYou, which is a welfare organisation committed to helping members of the LGBTQ+ community that have been ostracised or left behind by heteronormative/religious institutions.

The focus of this talk, being my very first engagement, was to help create a foundation for my understanding of the troubles and worries faced by the LGBTQ+ community here in Singapore, and how organisations are working in the national structure as determined by legislation in order to create a safe space for members of the community as well as potentially practice advocacy work.

Elle declared at the very start of our meeting that the purpose of getting involved in the active LGBTQ+ community was to seek out to “increase the inclusiveness of queer people who want to be religious/spiritual”. A common trend I found in our discussion was a conflicting between culture, religion, tradition and one’s desire to be openly part of the LGBTQ+ community. Therefore, I learned that plenty of organisations here in Singapore such as YouYou seek to fight the stigma surrounding the idea that one cannot be religious as well as part of the LGBTQ+ community, which is an idea preached by many of the religious institutions locally.

Another thing I learned that was very useful to know was that organisations here in Singapore tend to be much more about providing welfare support rather than performing active advocacy work. It seems that organisations here have accepted in a way that the structural framework within Singapore when it comes to the idea of free speech and assembly for protest makes it rather hard to actively fight for change without creating a negative stereotype around the LGBTQ+ community, therefore legitimacy tends to remain as identifying as a grass-roots organisation.

I think the biggest take away from this conversation is that the government tends to be rather pragmatic and populistic with their stance on LGBTQ+ issues here in Singapore; they recognise that the majority of their voter base tends to be the old conservative generations of the Lee Kuan Yew era, adversely affecting the way in which the government wants to identify itself on the issue. However, it is something that Elle believes will change in the tide of globalisation, with the cross-exchange of values and beliefs in our world as seen by states slowly repealing anti-LGBTQ laws and allowing for same-sex marriage, for example.