Blogtv's "Am I gay?" episode

"I was irritated that Phin Wong subsequently veered the discussion towards safe-sex education in schools instead of sticking to the topic of homosexuality," wrote Roy Tan in his quick review posted to Signel, the email forum of People Like Us. "In the end, the content turned out to be rather shallow."

He was referring to the 30 September 2008 episode of Channel NewsAsia's BlogTV, a 30-minute talk show series that tries to capture the interest of the blogging generation. This episode was titled "Am I gay?" but word went around in the week leading up to it that it would focus on sexuality education in schools.

In the end, the program as aired had about one-third of it on sex education generally -- contraception, teachers shocked when their teaching kits came with physical rubber models, the 30 percent of teenage girls who think that washing their genitals after sex would prevent pregnancy, and so on.

By failing to stay on topic, it didn't do much more than skim the subject of gay teens in the little time that was actually devoted to it.

Why such poor direction? No one outside of Mediacorp really knows, I suppose, but I can't shake off the feeling that they needed to establish deniability in case the Gods of Righteousness (also known as our censorious Media Development Authority) visit their wrath on them for "promoting the homosexual lifestyle". By including bits about contraception and pregnancy, Channel NewsAsia may believe they'd be able to offer the defence that the program was about sex education generally.

Or then again, it might have been just poor direction.

* * * * *

 
Still, it came out considerably better than Channel NewsAsia's last attempt to delve into this topic. In September 1999, there was an episode of Special Assignment that looked at sex education in schools. The last 5 minutes of that episode touched on gay teens. You can see the transcript of those 5 minutes in CNA special assignment: homosexuality, and my comments about it in CNA special assignment, sex education part 2

I can spot three major differences between the 1999 program and the 2008 one.

1. The locus of the problem has shifted. In 1999, the gay teen "Damien" (not his real name) was the problem that everybody addressed in an attempt to resolve the "error" of this ways. No one interviewed, except perhaps Michael Broughton of St Joseph's Institution, would affirm gay identity.
    
   In 2008, the Ministry of Education, teachers, officials and state policy was where the problem lay.
     
2. In 1999, the gay individual who appeared on the program was face unseen, but had his sex life dissected. Homosexuality was linked to promiscuity and unsafe sex. 
    
   Nine years on, in Blogtv, the gay individuals were the educators, the experts. The authorities were no longer treated as authoritative, but as the ignorant fools.
     
3. In 1999, the show concluded with an implied reiteration of the official policy that homosexuality is bad and such persons should change. The final voice-over assured viewers that Damien "has voluntarily sought counselling from the SPPA. He is trying to sort out his feelings for a girl who's expressed affections for him." 
    
   In 2008, Phin Wong, one of the two hosts, closed the show by saying that the chief priority in his view was "to create a non-judgemental environment", and "that's the only way to empower people."

 
How the discourse on homosexuality has evolved:

* * * * *

The guests in the 2008 Blogtv episode were Otto Fong, a former physics teacher who came out on his blog last year, George Bishop, Head of the Department of Psychology, National University of Singapore, and 2 teenage girls, Shraddha Ramsundar, 15 and Kohila Priyia, 18.

It was hosted by Phin Wong and the Flying Dutchman -- I don't know what his real name is.

To kick off the conversation, the hosts cited 2 surveys: one by the Nanyang Technological University last year which found that 68.8 percent had negative attitudes towards homosexuals; and another study of secondary school students, which found that 33 percent felt homosexuality was wrong, 35% believed homosexuals were responsible for spreading HIV, and 42 percent blamed gay people for paedophilia.

"Which I think is absolutely ridiculous," interjected the Flying Dutchman.[1]

Otto, who is now a fulltime cartoonist, recounted his growing up experience. He had written in his blog: Why has there been so little guidance avail to me as a gay teenager? It was a question I often asked myself growing up.

He then told the show what it felt like to discover himself gay around puberty: "It was a slowly growing dread whereby you start to have this inkling that you like someone, and then you realise that you are different... Hey wait, I like my classmate and it's not just the usual 'like'. And then the growing dread that 'Wait a minute, am I not supposed to like girls?'

"And then you tell yourself, 'It's a phase, and you'll get over it.' [But] it didn't go away, it just got stronger....

"I couldn't get any information on the shelf about gay stuff until I went to the States to study."

George Bishop pointed out that every one needs good role models. "One of the problems that gay teens run into is a difficulty in identifying good role models. One of the things that comes out when you take a look at the research literature, are what's effective in terms of reducing reducing HIV transmission and transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, is to have programs where in addition to dealing with the issues of sexuality, you deal with issues of empowerment and identity, and help people to develop their sense of identity -– 'Who they are' -- and basically develop community."

"One other thing I would to point out," Bishop added, "is what we're really talking about here is respecting differences," and that this has important mental health consequences. Gay young people are six times more likely to take their own lives.

Phin Wong noted out that since 2004, the Ministry of Education "has introduced full time school counsellors trained to provide guidance and support to students including questions about their sexuality. From last year, [they] expanded this to include a 2-day course on managing gender identity issues." [2]

Phin asked, "Is this a step in the right direction? Is this enough?"

The Flying Dutchman: "Two days?"

George Bishop: "Well, it's a start, and we hope that they way in which it is taught, is one that is respectful of differences. I mean, there have been workshops, often organised by conservative religious groups where, essentially, they proceed to demonise gays. And if that's the direction where they're going, then I'd rather they not do it."

Leona Lo -– Singapore's most outspoken transgendered person -– then came online. It's a good idea, she said, "but I'm more concerned about the content of the course. What exactly are they going to teach? Are they going to guide the students, help them navigate this difficult time or are they expecting them to conform to social expectations? I just hope it's not the latter. I hope it's just helping them to find their true identities. I just hope that counsellors will not impose their own moral judgements and values on these students [for] they may not always be right. So, I hope they go in with an open attitude."

Bishop agreed with her: "The only way you can deal with these issues is to be non-judgemental."

Kohila Priyia felt that you can't just tell people to be non-judgemental. "Before that happens, I think people should go for a course to learn how not to be judgemental."

Shraddha Ramsundar was even more skeptical about the whole idea of teachers or counsellors standing before a class delivering a lecture about gay people. "If my teacher is going to talk to me about homosexuality, I'll be like 'OK. I'm not sure', because she herself is straight. I mean, how can she talk about something she doesn't know.

Flying Dutchman: "So you want a homosexual to teach you about homosexuality? "

Shraddha: "If we have a live example, l mean, literally a gay men ... telling us about their life experiences and what they go through in life, probably we will be able to see it from their point of view, because ... I mean, if you're straight and you're talking to me about homosexuality, I won't trust you, because you're straight. I mean, how would you know?"

Earlier, Priyia had made two related points: firstly, that it's not the person who's gay who should get the information about homosexuality, but the people around him; and secondly, it's also "no use just getting information when people don't want to talk about it."

Coming back to the topic, Phin asked, "How do we teach it in schools?"

Otto Fong felt that for gay teenagers, the priority is safe sex education. The reality is that teenagers can get sex easily nowadays through the internet. "If you know teenagers, the first thing on their mind isn't 'OK, let's play safe'. The first thing on their mind is 'Oh, that's hot, let's get that'."

Flying Dutchman: "How do you deal with safe gay sex in school in the Singapore environment? We've got laws in place."

Exactly, Otto said. "The problem is that we can't."

Getting rid of 377A is important, he explained, because we have "to get rid of the stigma." Unfortunately, the Ministry of Education has to "hold that this is an illegal act and therefore should not be discussed at all in schools."

Bishop thought such a policy was quite wrong-headed. "Look at the evidence in terms of what works," he stressed. "What's very clear is that comprehensive sex education that involves talking about abstinence, but also talking about being faithful, and also talking about the use of condoms and contraceptives, is far more effective in terms of delaying the beginning of sexual activity, in terms of being safe, and so forth, than [talking about] abstinence only."

Underlining the absurdity of current policy, the Flying Dutchman called up a passage from the blog Mr Wang Says So and read it out loud: "Recently I signed up as a volunteer to give talks at secondary schools, [junior colleges] and [polytechnics] to raise Aids awareness. It seems that talking about (a) contraception, and (b) homosexuality is frowned upon. Abstinence is the only sexual thing that the authorities are happy for volunteers to talk about." [3]

The Dutchman summed it up: "So safe sex is not important. All you're told is 'No sex!' "

* * * * *

 
My friend Roy Tan has uploaded the Blogtv episode onto YouTube in three 10-minute parts:

 
I thought the program danced around the real issue. While the guests made it abundantly clear what should be in the sex education package when it came to homosexuality, and how it should be discussed (non-judgementally), and even touched on who should be the ones doing the talking or fielding questions (the gay person, said Shraddha), it failed to examine why the situation is the way it is at present.

Otto alluded to one aspect of the problem when he asked, rhetorically, "Are teachers willing to go out on a limb and talk about an issue on which the MOE (the Ministry of Education) has no clear stand, or have a very clear stand of not wanting to talk about it, and then risk the chance of parent feedback and then saying, 'OK, you are doing something that you shouldn't do and I'm going to complain to MOE'?"

It really begged analysis. Why is policy the way it is? Where does the buck stop? Must education of our next generation stay at the lowest common denominator of uninformed parents?

Channel NewsAsia didn't go there. Too contentious for our government to stomach, perhaps? How long do we have to wait before our media starts to ask some hard questions?

* * * * *

 
Invited to share his final thoughts, George Bishop reiterated: "I think it's absolutely essential to have biological facts there. And to be honest about them, and complete about them. I think it's very important to teach respect for differences, to realise that sexual expression does have a variety of ways in which it manifests itself, and to not be judgemental about that."

Otto's final thoughts were that it was very important to include the topic of gay sex, "specifically, safe anal sex and oral sex. The other thing... is that religion should be left out of the discussion because [if not] everybody would have a different opinion about it.

"If you want to know about gay people, ask a gay person."

© Yawning Bread 

Footnotes

1. Most quotes are true to what was spoken, but occasionally were "cleaned up" to make them more readable than halting speech. They are also quoted in roughly the order they appeared, but not always. Sometimes, they have been rearranged for narrative continuity.
   Return to where you left off

2. I thought Phin Wong introduced some confusion when he mentioned the term "gender identity" at various places, although he might simply have been quoting from the Ministry of Education (which counts some of the least enlightened people in it). Gender identity is an issue for transgenders – people with bodies of one sex, but who to varying degrees, feel they are of the opposite sex. Since the topic of this Blogtv episode was "Am I gay?" Phin should have used the term "sexual orientation".
   Return to where you left off

3. I tried to locate this passage from the blog -- and the URL (http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com) was provided on the TV screen -- but couldn't find it. I believe it might have been a comment left by one of Mr Wang's readers, rather than Mr Wang himself who wrote this.
   Return to where you left off

Addenda

None