Film censorship: Gays must die

Earlier this month, 'Today' newspaper did a 2-page spread reviewing the state of film censorship in Singapore. The article is archived in More action less cut.

The opinion is that since the introduction of additional rating categories between PG and the old R(A), now R21, censorship can be more nuanced.

Furthermore, there has been a bit more clarity as to what R21 is supposed to encompass, and with respect to sexual orientation, R21 now can include "homosexual themes".

This is still nowhere near good enough for those of us who believe that adults should be free to decide for themselves what they want to watch. R21, being the end category should mean "no cuts, no ban", at most with a warning notice as to the nature of the film.

After all, plenty of countries do not censor material meant for adults. It strikes me as silly to argue on the one hand that Singapore has an educational system as good as any in the West, that our people are as well-informed and intelligent as any in the West, and then say, oh, there are certain ideas and depictions that Singaporeans are unable to handle, so let's keep them from their eyes.

"Homosexual themes" must not be confused with any and every thing homosexual. The themes may be allowed, but once it gets physical, it's not. 

For example, the movie Saving Face, about two young Chinese-American women having an on-off-on relationship, still had a scene cut. Sylvia, who had seen a bootleg copy of it, noticed that the one bedroom scene when their breasts were visible was not there in the cinema version (A glimpse of that bedroom scene can be viewed at  http://media.putfile.com/Crazy4U22/320, never mind the rather cheesy "Crazy For You" playing in the background, Sylvia says)

That being the case, the arrival of Saving Face represented no advance. A very similar film, Wedding Banquet, had come to Singapore over 10 years ago. It had a Chinese-American guy in a relationship with a White guy, and like Saving Face, the film explored the complications of such diasporic relationships in the context of Chinese families that were still rooted in the cultural conservatism of China or Taiwan. Thematically, it's not any bolder than Saving Face, and if 4 feminine nipples together are still not allowed in 2005, then what's new?

The small surprise this year has been the screening of Lan Yu. This film had been banned 4 years ago, but a brave distributor re-submitted it and the ban was reversed. It was screened with an R21 rating a month ago, uncut. This fact is mentioned in the article in 'Today' newspaper.

Yet the same article also said that Formula 17 (see an earlier Yawning Bread article Film censorship: Formula 17 banned) remains banned. What is the difference between the two films? As I myself have not seen Formula 17, I posed the question on SiGNeL, the email forum.

These answers came back.

Dave: 
Lan Yu: sad ending... Formula 17: happy ending... the 2 male leads were together...

Clarence: 
[In Formula 17] the guys live happily ever after; almost all the characters, even the guys standing on the street waiting to cross the street, are gay; the film is about the relationship between a 30yo and a 17 (or 18) year old.

Hisham: 
Lan Yu featured gays in the stereotypical sense, it ended with tragedy. In Formula 17, there were NO heterosexual [characters]. EVERYONE was gay. It was a gay utopia. The film ended happily (gayly). Haha :)

Danyon: 
I still can't figure out why this harmless happy-go-lucky comedy Formula17 was banned. No graphic nudity, no f-words in the uncut original Taiwanese version. Even the somewhat unrealistic dream world of having only gay characters in that flick should not be reason. After all nobody has ever claimed that Romeo & Juliet would have painted a realistic picture of hetero love life... Nope, the only point I can think of is the mere fact that gays in Formula17 do NOT come along as guilt-ridden, victimised or self-loathing individuals. Here, they do what they want, they are confident (or sometimes not.... like the leading character) and happen to be as smart or as stupid as you and me… Am afraid it was this implicitness of having a bunch of more or less well-adjusted gays on the screen who just do their stuff that drives censors and fundamentalists wild…

Kelvin: 
Well for one thing, Lan Yu is about this ho chaam [Cantonese for very pitiful] couple and one of them end up dying in an accident or something like that. Basically, it's a sad story, but not untypical of Chinese story lines. I think what the @#$@$ censor sees as acceptable homosexual content is when gay people kill themselves, break up and not have a happy ending.... or end up marrying the opposite sex. I guess they only want people to think that gay people's lives should be depressing and sad... so as to "discourage" people from trying... yeah, like they themselves would try if it shows a happy ending. It's as if, if they showed a happy ending for transvestites or transsexuals, everyone would flock out there to drag or have a sex change!

Charles: 
Let's not forget that regulations still exist that mandate the non-portrayal of homosexuality in a positive light in the media. They would be the official justification for the difference in treatment.

Danyon:
In terms of explicitness "Lan Yu" revealed more nudity than Formula17: For a split second LanYu´s private parts (portrayed by Liu Ye) were fully exposed while he was lolling on the hotel bed. Formula17 didn't show much flesh.

Of course, there are more films with gay characters than just these two. However, I have limited my discussion to just Lan Yu and Formula 17 because there is a widely held view that a different, slightly looser, standard applies when the characters are non-Chinese (or non-East Asian) and the setting of the story somewhere in the West. While the censors still refuse even the slightest depiction of groin, white or yellow, there have been a few films shown in our cinemas where the ending or the gay characters are quite happy. The German film, Der bewegte mann (1994), comes to mind.

What explains this? Implicit racism in our censors' minds. The assumption is that of course the West is decadent, and our audiences won't be offended to see White people behaving badly. But if Asians are shown as gay and happily so, then it hits rather too close to home.

So, with respect to films with Chinese or East Asian characters and settings, it seems to be this: a film can portray homosexual people who may look deep into each others' eyes with longing, but they cannot be shown having sex. More importantly, they have to be unhappy or unsuccessful in love. Better if they die in the end.

© Yawning Bread 

Footnotes

None

Addenda

None