1. okay i didn't know that. 2&3. i kind of agree with tsm having to take responsibility. which brings to point 3 because if she did urge people to step up and change the way aware was being run, they could have done it in a MUCH better way that really wouldn't have created so much fracas. like being in sub comms first and realizing how things work rather than kick everyone out and try to "remake" aware if that was what they were even trying to do. also why i brought about the point of loving instead of judging. too much judging has been going on, but really... how is this being like Jesus? i'm quite sad too lilian. ): agree with pt 3.
Very interesting. I've done some thinking as well, and here are some thoughts in response:
I agree that the old guard was right to have some concerns about the intentions of the new exco. However, I think the EGM was a farce and it kind of made me disappointed with the old guard as well. My friend who went said that every time the new exco tried to speak they were met with boos and jeers; their voices really couldn’t be heard.I was disappointed as well, because they should've been given the chance to speak, making the facts self-evident, rather than based on common conjecture. But I really don't think the old guards were to blame - it wasn't them doing the shouting. Plus we have to bear the fiery atmosphere in mind - it's not often Singaporeans get to vote about anything vaguely important and we're, sad to say, politically immature; it's understandable that everyone would've been uncontrollably riled up. A lot of people also felt the new guards' presence was personally attacking them in some way, which I don't think they can be
( ... )
But I really don't think the old guards were to blame - it wasn't them doing the shouting. constance singam did this whole "where were you" speech ("Where were you when women were abused and battered in the home, and girls raped? Where were you when children and husbands of Singapore women were denied citizenship? Where were you?") which i don't know, doesn't seem very called for to me. i know that AWARE has done many things to improve women's rights but the new exco didn't even have the chance to prove itself (which is part of the inherent problem).
Plus we have to bear the fiery atmosphere in mind - it's not often Singaporeans get to vote about anything vaguely important and we're, sad to say, politically immature; it's just sad to see that we as Singaporeans cannot settle this issue amicably i guess.
it's understandable that everyone would've been uncontrollably riled up. A lot of people also felt the new guards' presence was personally attacking them in some way, which I don't think they can be
( ... )
the press has definitely scandalised the affair. homosexuality and the church isn't the main issue here, it's the poor handling of PA on the new exco's part because of their inability to address their agenda for the takeover right from the start + their inability to handle the their new power properly/tactfully/effectively, for eg. by asking dr thio to come out of the shadows they have made her seem like the mastermind behind the takeover/ firing the manager/ changing the locks/ spending too much money etc etc. another issue is perhaps the dwindling support of the old aware that made them vulnerable to such a takeover
( ... )
i agree with everything you said, except for the "old guard attacked the new guard based on their religion at all" because they did (maybe in part due to the whole media sensationalizing thing) but yes, i do not agree with what the new exco did in the first place.
and i think i did!! haha but i can't really remember what he said |:
he spoke up as a christian and called for christian women to not feel obligated to vote for the new exco based on their religion and gave a list of reasons why they should not!
Being far away + generally unaware current affairs-wise I might not have as much insight as others into this issue but the way I saw it the issue wasn't homosexuality vs Church at all, and it was quite annoying to see the media/the exco members themselves constantly discussing it as if it were the main issue.
To me, the main issue was the need to express concern at the suspicious way power was gained in one fell swoop by the new exco, and to remind people for the need of secularism (especially in a multi-cultural nation like Singapore). If it had to be boiled down to anything it was secularism vs religion-based politics, instead of homosexuality vs Church.
As aulait said, being the first time Singaporeans got to really have a say and make a change in anything, yes emotions ran high and things were said that probably didn't need to be said. ("Shut up and sit down", though, was amazing and I am actually tempted to get that T-shirt.) The boos and jeers were uncalled for and didn't give the new exco a chance to address the crowd, but as I
( ... )
it wasn't, but the press made it out to be so i felt. which is really not the whole point (kinda why i wrote this in the first place_
if you do get the shirt, get one for me too :P i don't know if there were previous conferences and the mikes of the old exco was switched off |:
i agree with you that secularism is very important. especially in a society like ours. i, too don't believe that we should impose our beliefs on others (:
Comments 19
Reply
2&3. i kind of agree with tsm having to take responsibility. which brings to point 3 because if she did urge people to step up and change the way aware was being run, they could have done it in a MUCH better way that really wouldn't have created so much fracas. like being in sub comms first and realizing how things work rather than kick everyone out and try to "remake" aware if that was what they were even trying to do.
also why i brought about the point of loving instead of judging. too much judging has been going on, but really... how is this being like Jesus? i'm quite sad too lilian. ): agree with pt 3.
Reply
I agree that the old guard was right to have some concerns about the intentions of the new exco. However, I think the EGM was a farce and it kind of made me disappointed with the old guard as well. My friend who went said that every time the new exco tried to speak they were met with boos and jeers; their voices really couldn’t be heard.I was disappointed as well, because they should've been given the chance to speak, making the facts self-evident, rather than based on common conjecture. But I really don't think the old guards were to blame - it wasn't them doing the shouting. Plus we have to bear the fiery atmosphere in mind - it's not often Singaporeans get to vote about anything vaguely important and we're, sad to say, politically immature; it's understandable that everyone would've been uncontrollably riled up. A lot of people also felt the new guards' presence was personally attacking them in some way, which I don't think they can be ( ... )
Reply
Reply
But I really don't think the old guards were to blame - it wasn't them doing the shouting. constance singam did this whole "where were you" speech ("Where were you when women were abused and battered in the home, and girls raped? Where were you when children and husbands of Singapore women were denied citizenship? Where were you?") which i don't know, doesn't seem very called for to me. i know that AWARE has done many things to improve women's rights but the new exco didn't even have the chance to prove itself (which is part of the inherent problem).
Plus we have to bear the fiery atmosphere in mind - it's not often Singaporeans get to vote about anything vaguely important and we're, sad to say, politically immature;
it's just sad to see that we as Singaporeans cannot settle this issue amicably i guess.
it's understandable that everyone would've been uncontrollably riled up. A lot of people also felt the new guards' presence was personally attacking them in some way, which I don't think they can be ( ... )
Reply
Reply
and i think i did!! haha but i can't really remember what he said |:
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
thanks for clarifying! haha i think i just wrote this cos i was kinda troubled by the whole thing so i didn't really write very factually. |:
Reply
To me, the main issue was the need to express concern at the suspicious way power was gained in one fell swoop by the new exco, and to remind people for the need of secularism (especially in a multi-cultural nation like Singapore). If it had to be boiled down to anything it was secularism vs religion-based politics, instead of homosexuality vs Church.
As aulait said, being the first time Singaporeans got to really have a say and make a change in anything, yes emotions ran high and things were said that probably didn't need to be said. ("Shut up and sit down", though, was amazing and I am actually tempted to get that T-shirt.) The boos and jeers were uncalled for and didn't give the new exco a chance to address the crowd, but as I ( ... )
Reply
if you do get the shirt, get one for me too :P i don't know if there were previous conferences and the mikes of the old exco was switched off |:
i agree with you that secularism is very important. especially in a society like ours. i, too don't believe that we should impose our beliefs on others (:
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment