Monday, 30 June 2014

A discriminating look at the Pink, the White, and the Ugly.

The comment on this news article:
The issue is not about homosexuality, or heterosexuality, or your sexual orientation, or your values. The issue is about Discrimination. 
What is the difference between these statements: 
1) The Jews killed Jesus.
2) The Gays will destroy our society, our morals, our values. 
The issue for the LGBT is that their sexual orientation leads to situations where they find themselves discriminated against, and these discrimination are instituted in our laws (e.g. 377A), and our customs (e.g. social and legal definition of marriage). 

However, for me and perhaps many others who were not prepared to don pink and attend the pink dot event, the question is, is the discrimination so debilitating as to render the members of the community unable to function in society, or severely hamper their functioning in society?
Your answer to that will determine if you attend the Pink Dot Event. 
The message of the Pink Dot event is simply: We are people too. End discrimination against LGBT! 
The message of the Wear White movement is: We are right! Continue Discrimination against the LGBT! 
For me, the Wear White message is reactionary and moral irredentism. I cannot support a proposal to continue discrimination. 
That said, the Pink Dot event also does not appeal sufficiently to me. "End Discrimination?" While I sympathise and accept that there is objectively some discrimination (again, e.g. 377A), I am not convinced that the discrimination is so strong, so pervasive, and so complete that LGBT are unable to function, survive and even thrive in SG society.  
(After all, I believe many heterosexual couples engage in activities that can be prosecuted under S377A. Those degenerates!) 
HOWEVER, I am not concluding that Pink Dot is redundant, or a devious attempt to undermine mainstream society. Their overt message simply is to change attitudes. And that is a correct approach. The formal, official institutions can maintain "official" discrimination, but non-discrimination at the social level could make things easier. 
I am not convinced that the discrimination against them is so debilitating that it is a priority. But, I am open to further information. 

No comments: