Aunt Webby letters, part 1

The second week of June 1998 opened a window for gay visibility in Singapore. It gave many internet surfers a rare peek into sexuality issues and the feelings of gay men. On the whole, it marked a significant advance on both fronts.

What actually happened was this: On Monday, June 8, Pacific Internet's webzine carried a letter titled "I'm gay" signed by a "Mr Invisible". It was followed by a response from their counsellor, Aunt Webby. In addition, readers' comments were also invited, and in the seven days following it, 36 letters from Pacific Internet subscribers came in and were added to the webpage. What was the significance of this event?

To start with, let's get a flavour of what Mr Invisible wrote to Aunt Webby. To quote him,

.... Nearly half a year ago I told my parents [that I'm gay] under less than desirable circumstances. Suffice to say there was a lot of crying and screaming. Which is fine -- the labels of me being 'sick' and 'perverse' is fine too ... How do I face my parents when all they have been thinking is when will I 'turn normal' ... and continue to urge me to get a girlfriend? How and why can people at large treat any groups of people in such a dismissive way?

Aunt Webby, Pacific Internet's counselor, tried to be sympathetic and helpful:

.... It might be difficult for your parents to be empathic because they haven't understood "it" all yet. They do not understand the struggles that gay individuals go through on their own and the choices they have to make on their own. They haven't been around positive gay role models, nor have they been around people who can still get on with life but still be gay.... the impressions that they are left with are probably negative stereotypes of gay individuals portrayed selectively and negatively by the media....

One week later, when I visited the site again, 36 readers' responses had been added. In the table below, I have classified them by the sexual orientation of the writer, and by the tone of the letter -- whether supportive or unsupportive (i.e. telling him he should change, or go seek professional, meaning psychiatric, help).  

 

No. of letters:	Definitely Gay	Probably Gay	Can't Tell	Probably Straight	Definitely Straight	TOTAL
Supportive	10	7	4	3	6	30
Unclear	0	0	0	1	0	1
Unsupportive	0	0	0	0	5	5
Total	10	7	4	4	11	36
	Notes: Some writers stated that they were gay, or that they had been through a coming out. They are classified as "Definitely Gay". Others could be deduced as "Probably Gay" from the point of reference they took in their letters. Likewise for the "Definitely Straight" and "Probably Straight". A writer who said he was "fully recovered" from being gay, through Christianity (what else?), was put among the "Definitely Straight". Not surprisingly, his letter was unsupportive. There were no clues to the writers' sexual orientation in 4 letters; they are classified as "Can't Tell".

 

The sample was not a representative snapshot of attitudes in Singapore, since the issue almost surely would have interested gay persons more than straight persons. It was nonetheless quite an interesting event, and the first time that as many as 36 letters have appeared together on this subject.

By the way, 36 is an unusually high number of responses for Pacific Internet's Aunt Webby page. I scrolled through 12 other topics which had been publicised for at least 7 days (the length of time it took for 36 responses to come in to Mr Invisible's letter), and the highest number of responses any other topic got was 17. Most were under 15; some fewer than 10.

The published letters were, on the whole, far more sympathetic and supportive than one might have expected a few years ago. Of course, having 17 out of 36 letters written by gay people would explain that, but to have 17 gay persons writing in was itself something new. Are there trends to be discerned?

Certainly, technological trends played a part. The big difference between this event and previous such letters sent to tabloid or magazine agony aunts was that this time it was on the internet. The internet has possibilities which print does not have. Readers can send in letters with a click of a mouse whereas with print they have to get an envelope, buy a stamp and walk to the post box. Webmasters can add the incoming letters to the webpage with an ease print editors never imagined.

The internet also allows considerable anonymity. Surfers redefine their identity at will. It's a whole lot easier for a gay person to write as a gay person when he has a greater confidence in his anonymity. Pacific Internet left out the names and email addresses of all the writers, unless the writers specifically included them in their letters. Even so, some proudly gay ones did.

Of the 17 gay respondents, 7 gave part of their name, or email address, or both:

No. of letters:	Definitely Gay	Probably Gay	Total
Gave his name and email	3	1	4
Gave email address only	1	0	1
Gave his name only	1	1	2
Remained anonymous	5	5	10
Total	10	7	17

10 out of 17 gay respondents remained anonymous. The option of anonymity is an important factor in the heady migration of gay communication in Singapore to the internet. It was through this cyber network that news of Pacific Internet's Aunt Webby letter zipped about, which in turn would have generated a high gay readership of the Mr Invisible letter, and the high write-in rate.

These technological trends must have skewed the outcome, which, as you can see from the first table, had supportive letters outnumbering the unsupportive 30 to 5. I don't believe that overall Singapore public opinion splits this way.

Yet, skewed outcomes are themselves agents for change. For every one who wrote in, thousands merely read. The arguments and the tone of the supportive letters must surely have an effect on how these readers saw the issue. A more detailed look at the contents of the letters, and the attitudes behind them, can be found in the companion piece, Aunt Webby letters, part 2. But generally the letters were either very gay-positive, or at least sympathetic. I can imagine that for many heterosexual readers of the Aunt Webby page, it must have been a blast to the mind. If even the heterosexual writers, more often than not, came across as trying to be understanding and supportive, this could well be the new political correctness. You may dismiss political correctness as superficial, but better to have the politeness of skin-deep tolerance than the aggressiveness of visceral homophobia.

Technology has always led in some way to social change, not necessarily in the ways we desire, nor even in ways we can predict.

The arrival of printing in Europe led to the mass production of Bibles, and whereas before that, the common folk depended on their priests and bishops to interpret Christianity for them, with the greater availability of Bibles, they could read the Word of God for themselves. One thing led to another and before long, the monopoly of the Roman Church was challenged by the rising Protestant movement.

The birth control pill vastly reduced the risk of pregnancy from sex. That would change all the sexual mores of the West, and now, even the East. I don't have to elaborate, surely.

On a lighter note, would Singaporeans, sweltering on our equatorial island, have acquired a taste for fresh salmon or strawberries, without refrigerated aircargo?

Dare we now hope that a wide-open internet might encourage more gay Singaporeans to speak up, and thereby promote a more open-minded society? 

Continue on to Aunt Webby letters, part 2 -- a review of the contents of the 36 letters.

© Yawning Bread 

Footnotes

None

Addenda

None