Of course we all know why the story could not be published in the campus media. In the matter of Chee Soon Juan and his Singapore Democratic Party, the govenrment's policy appears to be to deny them any publicity on their terms, or even neutral terms. Meanwhile, the mainstream media engages in a sustained demonisation of Chee and his party on behalf of the ruling party. Thus, to allow Chee to initiate his own publicity through his actions (such as visits to a university) would be contrary to the campaign.

Now, whether the university authorities knew by themselves that they should follow this line, and took the decision to censor the story on their own, or whether instructions came to them from some ministry, we don't know. Perhaps one day, the truth will come out.

* * * * *

 
Yet, in a sense, something has changed. This attempt to spike the story has failed, and in fact has boomeranged on the authorities, both university and state, for now lots more people in Singapore know that Chee visited the campus to distribute flyers and that students saw it as a newsworthy event.

Internet technology made a difference. The students running the campus newspaper and TV station put out their grievances through Facebook and opened a new blog (The Enquirer). The loosening of rules at Hong Lim Green also made a difference, legitimising protests there. The media showed up; Reuters and AFP carried the story around the world.

Contrast this with the lack of publicity when in 2001 the authorities banned a video documentary about opposition leader J B Jeyaretnam (recently deceased).

I found this snippet of information about the incident in Singapore Window:

In 2001, a 15-minute film about long-time opposition politician J.B Jeyaretnam, Vision of Persistence, by three lecturers at the local Ngee Ann Polytechnic was also banned because of its political content.

And in Singabloodypore:

Apr 2001 : Government officers raided Ngee Ann Polytechnic and confiscated film equipment and tapes after three lecturers had made a documentary about JB Jeyaratnam. The three were told that they could be charged in court if they went ahead with a planned screening of the film at the Singapore International Film Festival. They submitted written apologies for making the film and withdrew it from the Festival.

* * * * *

 
Singapore is not alone as a place where academic freedom is compromised. Nor is politics the only subject area considered untouchable. Gay-related work is often considered taboo too.

In April last year, five students were expelled from St Joseph's College of Communication in Kerala, India, for making a 5-minute film depicting homosexuality. The BA (Multimedia) students had made the film for an inter-college film festival.

The school administration felt that the film Secret Minds would corrupt young minds. One teacher said, "We teach modern technology and so we are generally open to new ideas. But this film was outrageously indecent."

The college authorities further said that the students had also acted entirely nude in it.

Prathyush, one of the students, denied the allegations. He said the film was well within the confines of the course to which they were admitted, and that they had acted only partially nude as required by the script.

"In any case, the film was not for public viewing but for a specific festival audience. They are just creating unnecessary fuss," he added.

See NDTV story at right.

A similar story – this time in Malaysia -- was related to me in August this year. I was attending a screening of short films, and one of the films was introduced as a graduation work by a film school student. It had a gay couple in it who were shown making love in the shower, then breaking up and finally coming together again. The organiser told the audience that the student was expelled for making the film. He never graduated. His lecturer too was expelled.

Unfortunately, for the life of me, I can neither recall the name of the film nor the filmmaker.

* * * * *

But little by little, things changed. It took a few brave academics to break the silence about the subject and reject the demands that homosexuality must be approached in judgementally negative ways. They saw this subject as worthy of intellectual enquiry and they began to encourage their students to do likewise.

As a result, over the last 5 years, I and my associates in People Like Us have seen an increasing stream of students approaching us for their project work. They have come from various disciplines, ranging from Business to Sociology, from Communications to Psychology, even Engineering. The most recent chap came from La Salle, a school that focuses on the arts.

Some of the students who have interviewed us have struck us as very bright, asking searching, challenging questions. Bit by bit, they are adding to the body of knowledge about sexual orientation and the place of gay people, in the Singapore context.

People Like Us now thinks it is time to honour the best work periodically. For that, we have instituted the Rascals Prize, with a cash award worth S$2,000, for the best research work -– not just by students, but also open to any independent researcher, regardless of age, nationality or occupation -– related to sexual orientation or transgenderism, and Singapore.

The prize is named after a seminal event in 1993 that occurred at a disco called Rascals. One Sunday night in May that year, the police barged in rudely to harass the mostly gay patrons of the club -- one of many such incidents -- and even hauled off some of them to the police station. But instead of taking it meekly, this time 22 of them got together to send a letter of protest to the police. They got an apology in reply.

The winner of the Rascals Prize will be decided by a jury of four highly regarded academics, all of whom are independent of People Like Us. They are:

1. Professor Michael Hor Yew Meng, NUS Law Faculty, also Chief Editor of the Singapore Journal of Legal Studies. He has written extensively on criminal law in Singapore.
     
2. Associate Professor Quah Sy Ren, Acting Head of the Chinese Division, School of Humanities and Social Science, NTU. An essayist and playwright, he is actively involved in the arts and civil society. 
     
3. Dr Sharon Siddique, a partner in a regional research consulting company based in Singapore. Prior to that, she was Deputy Director of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies where her research interest covers issues of culture, race and religion. 
     
4. Dr Kenneth Paul Tan, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, NUS. He specializes in Singapore studies and focusing on topics such as democracy, civil society, media, multiculturalism, and meritocracy.

(It should be noted that they have agreed in their personal capacities, and their official affiliations mentioned above are only for reference.)

The submissions will be assessed for intellectual and research merit, and not whether the conclusions suit or not suit People Like Us' aims.

So if you've got work done on this subject, the time to submit it is now. For more details, see the Rules.

© Yawning Bread