While this seems like a little episode, the courageous acts of these youths are commendable. They set out to fight for their cause by publicly showing that they don't agree with the policy; and even going the extra step to engage the administrators, trying to persuade them why they are doing what they are doing.

While they were being lead away, they created a scene by showing the students and the media what they were protesting against, and hence created awareness. The recruiters had also been pleasantly won to their side of their argument by smiling at them. They were not seen as troublemakers but courageous adults who had the guts and will to stand up for their rights.

The spin-off from non-violent action can sometimes bring about surprising results. By impressing the crowd and the administrators who are responsible for supporting the system through non-violent means, they are slowly eroding away the grip that pervades the "don't ask don't tell" policy. And they manage to do all this while showing their determination with one small act.

Transplant their action in Singapore and they might not be so lucky. Most people's mindset or perception towards non-violence is still stuck to mischief making. The well-known advocate of non-violence or civil disobedience in Singapore is Dr Chee Soon Juan and the local press has deviously painted a picture of him as a publicity-whore and foreign-seeking opportunist.

Formerly teaching psychology at the National University of Singapore, Chee became an Opposition politician, only to be bankrupted from defamation suits launched by the Lees of the governing and dominant PAP party.

This is the Singaporean who has wielded various types of non-violence on countless occasions to champion the democracy cause. He is the Singapore Rebel in Martyn See's documentary, going on a hunger strike to protest against his dismissal from the university. He has delivered (or at least tried giving) a speech at Raffles Place and outside the Istana and subsequently jailed for speaking in public without a permit.

This year, he was imprisoned for showing "contempt" in court when he tried to explain how the bankruptcy hearings against him were politically motivated. He has just been released for speaking without a permit while selling the New Democrat, the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) newsletter during the elections. This was the controversial newsletter over which Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong have filed a suit against the SDP and its Central Executive Committee members. They alleged that the paper accused the PAP of corruption. Chee is also the one who led a team of activists to stage a march that was stopped by the police during the IMF meeting that resulted in a 72 hours standoff, making the front page of Financial Times.

Quite impressive a record yet most Singaporeans seem to regard his antics of civil disobedience as acts of mischief. At times, the feedback is that non-violence or civil disobedience will not work in this country because we have a situation of every man for himself. Then, there are the usual retorts that no one wants to go to jail or that being a martyr doesn't solve the problem, among other reasons.

In Singapore, every NGO or group I know is quite happy to channel their frustrations through the official channels. This essay is not a criticism against such efforts.

Rather, the question is," Why are young Singaporeans so eager to lap up these official channels when history has proven that the governing party has never relented? Or more importantly, why are our activists not seemingly as courageous as those from overseas?

If we were to put those student activists in the Singapore context, something like this should have happened long ago. Considering that hundreds of gay males in Singapore are enlisted for National Service every year, why hasn't any gay to-be recruits come together to oppose against our "don't ask don't tell policy?" Note that the above incident did not occur in some prestigious university but a private small school, involving less than 20 students. So the assumption that only intellectual students would dare dream of such feats does not hold in an argument.

Non-violence, in certain cases, civil disobedience, is something that the LGBT community in Singapore has yet to consider. This is not to point the finger at the community but rather trying to understand why it has not taken root. We could say non-violent education has not happened or that circumstance does not seem to permit it given that the culture is one of toeing the official line. No one wants to be the first slaughtered lamb.

Whether the LGBT or human rights movement here will embrace such measures is yet to be seen. Nevertheless, some of the world's liberation movements have made people understand the issues. ACT UP, as an example, was renowned for staging controversial and theatrical protests to highlight the AIDS epidemic issue in USA when the US government was reluctant to acknowledge its severity.

Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in the 2003 Iraqi war while serving in the military, was pushed to campaign to bring the troops home. Her perseverance has made her an icon of the anti-war cause in America. She has since been giving lectures and picketed outside the White House to spread the word.

In Asia, Ang San Syu Kyi and Dalai Lama are both well known in using non-violence to highlight the plight of their fellow countrymen. The former, though under house arrest, has become a democracy representative in her country and worldwide, so much so that it has earned her the Nobel Peace Prize. The latter is in exile and traveling around the world to tell others about Chinese barbarity towards Tibetans, while trying to achieve sovereignty.

People around the world commit countless acts of non-violence and civil disobedience every day to protest against injustices that they strongly feel against. Using non-violence to highlight what is wrong with the system often helps win over those sitting on the fence. People who use it are not mischief-makers. They are like you and me, individuals with families and friends. Yet, they stand up because they know that if something is wrong, then they have the obligation to make it right.

This essay does not aim to make people change their minds about non-violence. After all, it is a school of thought and action of which its uses and effectiveness is still constantly evolving and requires much study and practice on the part of users and academics. Nevertheless, non- violence is nothing new. Mahatma Gandhi has used non- violence to force the British to relinquish its Indian colony while Martin Luther King has used it to bring about greater political and social freedom during the civil rights movement in US. It is one method that has still been universally used to bring about changes.

The Rose revolution in Georgia and the Orange revolution in Ukraine are two more recent examples in which non- violence has been used successfully to topple dictatorships and bring about democracy in their own countries.

But whether someone endorses using non-violence or civil disobedience, it is time Singaporeans take a step back and understand activists use it as a method to highlight the injustices of their society.

It is easy to continue knocking off ideas when someone suggests a non-violent act with rhetorics of "Well, it wouldn't work in Singapore because no one cares" or "I have my family to think about".

However, the greatest barrier lies with what's playing in the mind. Prejudices and fear to comprehend the block to effective campaigning is the activist's greatest enemy. If non- violence can help them reach their goals, then it must be used.