The AWARE AGM 2009 — my personal take: beware of ST
From 21 Apr onwards: Please refer to http://we-are-aware.sg for future updates.
This is the closest to an official Old AWARE members website that is available. I can vouch for the website authors — they are the most reliable direct sources of information currently.
Edited 20th Apr :
Since the 11 Apr, the information obtained from both the public media, and importantly , 1st – hand information key AWARE members have convinced me that the New Exco has an agenda to silence the voice that espouses the values AWARE stands for.
See my latest post EDITED 19th APR. Please see this instead:
http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/aware-agm-2009-eogm-may-2nd-do-something/
===========================================
Having personally attended AWARE’s latest AGM, here is my personal take on it. I haven’t spoken to anyone within the organisation on this, it’s a completely personal and independent view.
“Unknowns knock out veterans at Aware polls
Caught off-guard by big turnout, longtime members lose to fresh faces
By Wong Kim Hoh “
Having being at the AGM, i’m actually wondering, what is ST’s purpose in angle-ing the story that way.
and more importantly, since ST is the mouthpiece of the govt
what is the govt trying to contain?
what is the govt trying to tell the public about AWARE?
what is the impact of this report on ppl who are getting their info by simply reading that report?
we made a big impact last year with the sexual harrassment case you know?
It seems from the report that this group is trying to take over
without having made any contributions
and internet chatter says this group is anti-gay as well….
If i didn’t know how the ST is a propaganda tool, i would put it down to bad journalism
I know that from time-to-time, listening to the old members, we’ve heard war stories about the govt interfering in AWARE.
I just took a look at our achievements:
http://www.aware.org.sg/?page_id=19
It seems to me that all our achievements have to do only either a very small segment of society eg. Female medical students, or else a powerless/disenfranchised group with little political impact eg citizen ship for female’s children when the male is a foreigner. And that too is in line with our population policy. Stuff like men and women being “heads of households” are very philosophical, little political impact.
The only exception is probably “ 2005 equalisation of benefits in the current medical scheme in the Civil Service for male and female officers”. I wasn’t that politically conscious then , so I don’t really know, but I’m curious to know what was the govt response during then. But that “problem” is not really something people were shocked by —- we all knew about the unequal benefits for the longest time already!!!! I believe we also did something to raise the awareness of how CPF is biased against women in their old age. That’s something to look at too.
Over the last couple of years, the last Exco, headed by Constance Singam, JooHymn, they’ve made a conscious, intended effort to mainstream the issues we deal with.
That means, instead of just limiting issues to HIV positive women, or domestically abused women, or poor body image, they’re talking about Work-Life Balance. And the extremely high impact Sexual Harrassment at the workplace. So suddenly, its not a group of helpless women who have been marginalised. The issues are about every woman. We’re continuing to go down that road — there was that report about Sexual Harrassment on public transport systems being common. And from what I’ve heard, the Sexual Harrassment issue has gained ears all the way up in the govt echelons. Stuff like that galvanises mass support — something which can be seen as a threat to political power. We could see the rise of a women’s voting bloc which has been so conspicuously absent in Singapore, as opposed to many other 1st world nations.
Issues like this also motivate more people to join AWARE. When issues affect you, when you see a group that goes beyond the “charity for helpless” model, and actually does something effectively for the mainstream, people start to feel like this is an effective platform where they too, can DO something about things. I would expect that our membership increases greatly. And as with most NGOs, it will be made up of the “victims”. This time, the “victims” are not the marginalised women. They are the powerful women who have work-life balance issues, they are the women who went through the corporate world dealing with sexual harassment. These are women with achievements, and they see another platform where they can contribute. These are women, who have succeeded in life, because their work-style is , ‘I’m coming into the room, don’t waste my time, let’s get down to work, I’ve been an effective leader outside, and I know how we should do things here to make it better, so put me on Exco’
While what the report said was true, about the questions asked on religion and homosexuality, I think the report focused on this and nothing else. I felt it was part of a normal and healthy debate, that you hardly find with the general apathetic Singaporean population, but was very expected with a group of very enthusiastic , powerful women, who were far from apathetic, who joined Aware because they wanted to do something.
Why do I think religion became an issue? I think it just goes with the general trend of the changing microculture that’s evolving over the last few years. Religion vs secularism is becoming increasing loud and polarised in general, and globally. When you have an organisation dealing with sexuality, with women’s rights, with homosexuality (to a certain extent, though we’ve never wanted to be flag bearers in this respect), you can expect religion to be brought up.
Why was homosexuality brought up? Look at it in the context of other issues that were also brought up equally loudly, : Time Management and commitment, experience, feminist thought, continuity vs innovation, past achievements, ……. Homosexuality is just another point that would naturally come up in a feminist organisation! I realise there seems to be some suggestion of them being anti-gay.
Here’s my take.
When AWARE deals with issues of marginalised women, you tend to attract all sorts of marginalised women into the organisation, and homosexual-rights-crusaders are a major group. These people are still there, and they want to make sure AWARE still has non-discriminatory policies.
Then when AWARE mainstreams, you attract mainstream women, and strong mainstream women too, who are of a certain level of age and achievement. Such women tend to see feminism as the movement to “protect and fight” for the rights of women in general, in the mainstream, against the male chauvinists. In general, Singaporean mainstream women also tend to be conservative, safe and pro-family values ( where do you think work-life-balance, and anti-sexual-harrassment comes from??? ). Am I surprised that they have conservative views where homosexuality is concerned? Absolutely not. Will this be good for AWARE/ Singapore? I don’t know. Will there be a drive AGAINST homosexuality? I really don’t know, but I suspect they are busy people and would rather invest their time achieving their pet goals instead of being out to get a certain group in society. Remember, they brought up their views in response to questions, and a lot of other background material was the ST-Journalist’s own research and portrayal. But more importantly , was there a concerted anti-gay conspiracy ? I think you need to have a very good imagination, and be psychotically paranoid to believe that.
Was there a conspiracy?
Here’s why I am quite certain there isn’t.
Most people only knew a couple of candidates out of the many that stood for election
We had a round of election speeches, followed by the elections. By the time voting was done, people could hardly remember who was who, who said what, and we needed to introduce the candidates separately before voting again! I suppose that if it’s a conspiracy, people would at least KNOW most of the candidates ? Could the 100 voters there be faking ignorance to orchestrate the conspiracy? Possible, but how believable !??!?! In Singapore, where 100 middle aged women gather, and they all had discussions AND acting lessons before hand???? It was a very democratic, transparent process. Votes were by “raise of hands” rather than secret ballots, meaning that you couldn’t even claim rigged vote counting!
Also, the people who were voted in were GENUINELY and VERY SIGNIFICANTLY better than some of those who were NOT voted in. I was one of the candidates who was NOT voted in, and I will be the first to admit this fact. As for some of the “old guard” who were not voted in, I would say that the margins were SO close that I hardly think there was a conspiracy. When you have 100 women voting openly, assuming they were not OSCAR winning actresses, and the chosen person won by a 60-40 margin, I don’t see that as a conspiracy. It could have swung both ways, and would be very hard to control.
One last issue I want to bring up, again on why I think there might be a reason to contain AWARE’s influence and support base. Human trafficking, migrant worker abuses, are becoming a HUGE issue in Singapore, one that the State does not openly admit to. I’m not going to detail it here, but you would be able to find much info just by googling, or following some of the other websites. TOC did a brilliant coverage last year.
AWARE writes the CEDAW shadow report to be submitted to the UN. Prostitution and human trafficking is a big issue, and the info we are gathering could be unsettling. I see that as a great motivation for containment.
So in conclusion, I think we must think about WHY the ST report was written, rather than focusing on why what happened, happened.
Here’s a snippet of MSN conversation that I’m including on my take of the election outcome.
hey
11/4/2009 12:51:36 AM B mathia wat happened to AWARE??
11/4/2009 12:53:24 AM B mathia http://thinkingbetterthinkingmeta.blogspot.com/2009/04/are-you-aware-of-aware.html
11/4/2009 12:58:27 AM mathia B i was there
11/4/2009 12:59:27 AM B mathia wats your take on what happened
11/4/2009 12:59:33 AM B mathia i assume u don’t know the new pple
11/4/2009 12:59:48 AM mathia B honestly, it was the 1st AGM i ever went to
11/4/2009 1:00:06 AM B mathia so u didnt have much expectations
11/4/2009 1:00:20 AM mathia B kind of
11/4/2009 1:00:47 AM mathia B but i don’t know if the “old members” are being sharp and perceptive that there’s a “conspiracy”
11/4/2009 1:00:54 AM mathia B or simply that they feel threatened
11/4/2009 1:01:09 AM mathia B whether or not there is a conspiracy
11/4/2009 1:01:26 AM mathia B or if the activities we did in the past yr have succeeded in drawing new members
11/4/2009 1:01:44 AM mathia B and like most new members of any org, they are simply a lot more enthusiastic
11/4/2009 1:02:19 AM mathia B because frankly. the new members that stood for election and won, were genuinely of better quality, when you look at it objectively
11/4/2009 1:02:38 AM mathia B i don’t know the affiliations of the ST reporter
11/4/2009 1:02:42 AM B mathia i see
11/4/2009 1:02:44 AM mathia B it sounds very biased to me
11/4/2009 1:02:55 AM mathia B where does your interest come from?
11/4/2009 1:02:57 AM B mathia yeah it suggested that they had an agenda
11/4/2009 1:03:10 AM B mathia mostly curiosity
11/4/2009 1:03:17 AM B mathia a bit of concern
11/4/2009 1:04:03 AM mathia B concern? why?
11/4/2009 1:04:32 AM B mathia if, as the article suggests, that there’s something bad going on, then i’m naturally concerned
11/4/2009 1:04:46 AM mathia B something bad???
11/4/2009 1:04:47 AM B mathia hard to explain why beyond that
11/4/2009 1:04:53 AM mathia B it doesn’t sound like something bad is going on
11/4/2009 1:04:56 AM B mathia say a conspiracy or watever
11/4/2009 1:05:07 AM mathia B it sounds like something the current old gaurd does not like……….
11/4/2009 1:05:52 AM B mathia that’s something for sure
11/4/2009 1:06:49 AM B mathia but there’s the ‘evidence’ that most of them are anti gay
11/4/2009 1:08:14 AM mathia B but AWARE has never really pushed gay rights to start with. And its never been a priority or mission to. Plus, it could be the journalist’s angle
11/4/2009 1:08:55 AM B mathia of course – ST in particular. i don’t trust ST
11/4/2009 1:09:00 AM B mathia that’s why i’m asking u
11/4/2009 1:10:00 AM mathia B i’m a simple person………. or maybe ignorant……….. but i would go with my interpretation of our new member drive just being very successful in the last few months , and new members being more enthusiastic
11/4/2009 1:10:14 AM mathia B the reason why i think thats the case?
11/4/2009 1:10:42 AM mathia B i think over the last 2 yrs, there has been a intended drive to mainstream the issues AWARE deals with
11/4/2009 1:10:51 AM mathia B so as opposed to dealing with Abused women
11/4/2009 1:11:08 AM mathia B we were dealing with work place sexual harrassment. Work life balance
11/4/2009 1:11:28 AM mathia B you can see how the 2 different issues would attract 2 different crowds
11/4/2009 1:11:40 AM mathia B and how ppl in the 2nd case would be a bit more mainstream
11/4/2009 1:12:12 AM mathia B and how ppl who have achieved a certain level of success might be in the age group where they are very strongly female-rights-at-the-expense-of-men
11/4/2009 1:12:23 AM mathia B and not completely supportive of gay rights
11/4/2009 1:13:12 AM B mathia and were there problems with the old guard?
11/4/2009 1:14:47 AM mathia B with every volunteer group of super strong women,
11/4/2009 1:14:57 AM mathia B you could always see things wrong with people
11/4/2009 1:15:04 AM mathia B i think it was a matter of
11/4/2009 1:15:34 AM mathia B “i know what’s wrong with her” vs ” I don’t know anything about her” and so i’ll rather go with the 2nd choice and hope
11/4/2009 1:16:59 AM B mathia well i was trying to see if there were some disatisfaction with the old guard
11/4/2009 1:17:45 AM mathia B the general way that s’poreans like to complain
11/4/2009 1:17:48 AM mathia B but then again
11/4/2009 1:18:03 AM mathia B i’m looking from a point of ignorance. Really bad with insider gossip
11/4/2009 1:19:13 AM B mathia you’re just blur
11/4/2009 1:19:14 AM B mathia 
11/4/2009 1:19:57 AM mathia B you summed it up i think …..= )hehehheeh
One afterthought:
One of the candidates used her affiliations with LKY to campaign.
It there’s any conspiracy i would vaguely be concerned about, it’s this:
If there has been any persuasion on the part of governmental figures to encourage women who were sympathetic to the feminist cause it the “appropriate” way to be part of the exco. These women might have an outstanding CV, but their passions and views may be just a lot more convenient for the govt to deal with. Eg. less focus on the human trafficking issue.
It’s prudent to be cautious with mainstream media reports.
Still, you are saying that the previous Exco worked hard to broaden AWARE’s relevance to every woman, thus encouraging a large influx of new members who then “thanked” them by voting them out of office?
That may not be a conspiracy but it is certainly unusual.
[...] AGM Coup D’etat (or Organized Crime) of Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) The AWARE AGM 2009 — my personal take: beware of ST Be Careful Gays, Aware Has Already Been Taken Over By People U Do Not Wish To Be In Power Anti-gay [...]
“we made a big impact last year with the sexual harrassment case you know?”
Har?
http://www.asiaone.com/Just%2BWoman/News/Women%2BIn%2BThe%2BNews/Story/A1Story20080709-75660.html
http://www.aware.org.sg/download.php?file=pressrelease/2008-Jul-09%20AWARE%20Report%20on%20Sexual%20Harassment.pdf
Many people have been voicing their concern about the impact of the new exco on AWARE’s existing programmes, especially where things like Sexuality are concerned.
For those of you who have been following my blog, you will have noticed I’m very active in this programme, and so is Caris Lim, one of the old-timers who was re-elected.
I will assure everyone, that as long as I am involved, I will always make sure that only secular, responsible and non-discriminatory messages are being put across.
I sincerely hope that supporters of secular, responsible and non-discriminatory education of any subject, will continue to support AWARE, and to let others know that we are still committed to this vision. There are many people who might not be in the exco, but we are the ones making sure this programme works and that it is being carried out. We do face prejudice from the conservative factions of society, and we hope that the enlightened people will continue to support us, instead of simply writing us off, because they have been scared off by an ST report about an unusal AGM outcome.
If we lose your support, then perhaps, the goal of the ST report (if indeed it was so, but I’m merely speculating) would be achieved.
Mathia, thank you very much for sharing your perspective on this. It is true that only time will tell *exactly* what the new AWARE will do, although I think the public records on some of the attendees are certainly suggestive (not sure if you have seen my piece on GC yet).
However, my doubt about your theory is this – if AWARE has suddenly attracted a lot of autonomous attention from many different unconnected individuals because of your work, and that is the reason for the AGM result, then:
1) Why didn’t these interested individuals contact the existing AWARE leadership with offers to volunteer or statements of their particular interest before? Why does it seem they were all unknown to the existing ledaership? If one was really so keen, why wouldn’t one get involved prior to, and in more than, the AGM, before one decided one knew who it was appopriate to vote for?
2) Wy didn’t these interested individuals vote for the same teams that continued the same kind of work that supposedly drew them in and made them so interested in the first place? Why join an organisation because you find their work compelling and then vote against the people responsible for that compelling work?
You said that other aspects of feminist thought were also discussed at the meeting. Would it be possible for you to explain what some of these were, and how the conversations played out, to explain how the issues of continuity raised by these questions might be resolved?
Someone else who was present on that day informed me that for the key exco positions, the margins were won by 80-20, and that the 60-40 figures were more seen with the ordinary members. So I’ll like to add this info to what I have said.
I think at this point, more speculation would not be useful anymore; we need to move forward. Reading all the stuff out there on the internet, we can see that many people think that AWARE has lost its credibility to a certain extent because of the new exco, and I imagine the general public’s sentiments are not too far off.
In particular, Sexuality Education has been pointed out. I think that’s a very misleading impression, because I know my CSE team, and I know that as long as we’re around, we’re not going to change our message. I know we would never give in to any pressure to change our message. I know we would do something if any AWARE leadership insists we change our message.
Personally, I have faith in the election process — we can’t want democracy without accepting its dangers! But I believe an organisation is more than its exco — its also about people who will defend our core beliefs that are stated in the Constitution.
[...] Not Secular Feminists But Sectarian Fundamentalists: And They’ll Come For You Too – Mathia Lee: The AWARE AGM 2009 — my personal take: beware of ST – Where Bears Roam Free: Gays now facing a backlash from their own doing? – Unwired Precipitations: [...]
i maybe over concern or worried for nothing but can you and Caris Lim overturn the decisions made by the majority of the committee?
what if your new committee decide to spread anti-homosexual messages or pro-christianity messages to the students.
well, can an EGM be called with all members present to oust them all out?
certainly a purge of the membership of the moles might even be possible.
You better decide fast mathia lee. I heard the brotherhood r under alot of pressure from their female readers to respond robustly to this whole matter. It seems their attempt to trivialize it has back fired. And now many of their readers are asking hard hitting questions like whether there is any basis to the claim, this whole change in leadership was planned. The new exco should act fast to restore confidence.
I think everyone is still speculating, and it is dangerous and unfair to everyone if actions are carried out based on fear and speculation.
If you feel that you need to do something now, the best way to help is to
1. continue spreading the messages of justice and equality irregardless of gender, sexual orientation in addition to race language and religion.
2. join AWARE and swing the votes the other way
While I cannot make promises about the final outcome, I can promise that I will do everything I can to ensure that our message continues to be the one we’ve stood for all along, with regards to the Sexuality Education programme. Besides Caris, I am confident that my entire team will do the same. We have been doing this, and will continue to do this, irregardless of the religious position of any member of the organisation.
But ultimately, AWARE is a platform, not the ends to our means. We do what we do, not for AWARE’s sake, but for the needs of our society. As long as that need exists, we and many others will do our best to meet that need. And I hope that everyone who agrees with us will do whatever they can too, in their respective niches in society and in life.
While I feel sorry for AWARE, being the innocent third party being taken out, I hardly have any sympathy for the gay community who have been for last few years, been bawling instead of working.
This incident in fact cements my belief that gays are just good at talking and bawling only. Below is how I view gays in the light of how they react to the takeover issue – childish brats who bawl instead of working something out.
http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2009/04/oh-boy-gays-are-howling-again.html
As for the status of Aware, whether it will be all inclusive and secular, that is another story in itself. Somehow I feel that being secular itself is sectarian.
[...] women who are high-achievers to join AWARE. (Read Mathia’s blog here, in particular, her latest posting concerning [...]
From Yawning Bread’s bawling rant against the new management of AWARE and the criticism of the new Exco’s alleged non-equality, non-gay inclusive, stance:
It also illustrates the problem that perennially faces those of us of a liberal persuasion. We are nowhere as organised as the Religious Right is. In a way, it has to do with the way liberals think. We are by nature accommodating and pluralistic. . . . We have a tendency to believe that our moral position is unarguably stronger than the illiberals’, that if only people would open their minds, they’d see the world our way. . . . We forget that even if a wild animal might not have our moral and intellectual credentials, it can still be bloody dangerous.
http://ybsampler1.blogspot.com/2009/04/from-now-on-be-wary-of-aware.html
Emperor’s new clothes indeed. The diatribe quoted sounds no different from the infamous phrase, “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.”
Remember repeal for Section 377A?
This is backlash.
“This incident in fact cements my belief that gays are just good at talking and bawling only. Below is how I view gays in the light of how they react to the takeover issue – childish brats who bawl instead of working something out.”
Yah the gay community is always bawling… to you only lah!!!
Yah all homosexuals are childish brats… ain’t you sick of saying this?
If you have nothing else better to say or do, go call other str8 kids childish instead.
Please even if all gays are childish, there will still be more childish str8 kids around statistically.
Mathia are u able to ban this so called bigot mascarading as a liberal “solo bear” out of your blog? He is an INSULT to our Singaporean society
hi mathia, found your site while googling AWARE, would you believe that? *whistles* nice to hear from the perspective from someone who was there.
after reading your article, it could be that the situation at AWARE arose from:
1) purposeful conspiracy – through emails and text messages to known supporters, the coup was arranged. spike in membership, attendance at AGM and voting arranged. (since background checks could have been done, it could be a simple case of prejudice – don’t vote for these 9 or 12 people.)
for – quite straightforward. explains why the new nominees seemed “better”… they were prepared to “fight” but the old members had been expecting a walkover “as usual”. new nominees said little about their plans for AWARE, they didn’t care. new president left AWARE, she didn’t care. and the old members and ex-exco members suspected a coup, as their interviewers reported.
against – too simple an explanation? and whoops, 3 “escaped”.
2) pure coincidence – through AWARE’s programs, many people were inspired to sign up as members and attend the AGM. at the AGM, AWARE may have had a list of “favoured” candidates drawn up, but none were expecting opposition, or to have to defend themselves, so they could only offer a weak presentation.
some new members were nominated into positions by their own small groups of friends, who thought, “why not offer some opposition, just for fun?” or “I really think he/she can take up this responsibility.” the new nominees just went with the flow and presented their credentials. all the new members had no prior exposure to the members who had served in AWARE, and so voted totally without prejudice towards or against them.
for – explains the lack of acting observed by you, who as a first-time member at the AGM experienced the “blurness” that is to be expected. new nominees also had little to say about their plans for AWARE, as noted. new president quit after a few weeks – not up to the challenge maybe? media blackout – newbie committee can’t take the stress?
against – who would willingly run for the positions offered if they had never served at AWARE? and who would vote for someone with obviously no prior experience at AWARE – unless it was painfully unclear who were the ones with no experience? and for at least 9 new exco-members to be so nominated and elected boggles the mind. remember, they would have to take over any existing AWARE projects with minimal guidance.
3) personal calculation – as mentioned AWARE’s programs increased its influence and membership base, but none on their list of candidates were prepared to offer more than a basic presentation what they’ve accomplished in AWARE.
furthermore, at least 9 of their new members had calculated plans for running for a position on the exco, unaware or dismissive of the fact that they could also serve as a sub-committee member, or that serving as a sub-committee member would broaden their understanding of the vision, mission and projects of AWARE.
for – explains the lack of acting. those are serious contestants, confident that their professional experience would guide them in running AWARE in the right direction. may explain why they seemed more prepared than AWARE’s candidates.
against – if these people are in their right mind and knew exactly what they were doing, they ought to expect a very steep learning curve and opposition from experienced members. and one would expect them to share more openly about their plans for AWARE. and usually in running for a position like president, one would expect to gather a team of trusted people around instead of strangers.
sorry for such a long comment.
Trev croaked:
Mathia are u able to ban this so called bigot mascarading as a liberal “solo bear” out of your blog? He is an INSULT to our Singaporean society.
How about banning you from Singapore?
You’re an insult to humanity.
Touting yourself as a preacher of pluralism while advocating fascism and censorship.
Why am I not surprised?
Hooray for the new Exco of AWARE!
Very Lonely Bear,
If kicking a bigot out of a blog = fascism + censorship, then the whole cyber world would have been full of fascists.
As yet most of the modern world is democratic, so your pathetic little touts are just simply pathetic.
I dun give a damn if the EXCO of AWARE or even AFA is stuffed with Theo Li Anns, please you are just pathetic ha!!!
As for any surprises: Your “This incident in fact cements my belief that gays are just good at talking and bawling only” is so YESTERDAY. You have been trumpeting that over repeat BULLSHIT over and over and over and over since the Repeal!!!
Please, we are just fucking BORED by your retarded “views”.
yours gayly,
Trev
P/S: Got balls use real name please, not some silly BS like Solo Bear, MonoGrizzly, and any other similar shit. Oh how bout lonely hairy old man? Suits you better!!!
I dun give a damn if the EXCO of AWARE or even AFA is stuffed with Theo Li Anns, please you are just pathetic ha!!!
Oh, really? Then why are you whining on this post?
Please, we are just fucking BORED by your retarded “views”.
Please grow up and stop having Lily Allen on repeat on your pink Nano.
P/S: Got balls use real name please
As if “Trev” is any “real name.” Got balls scan your identity card, birth cert, bank account number, your SAF 302, home address, workplace address, phone number here.
Tsk… typical queenie posturing.
yours gayly,
Trev
Yes, the typical TMI behaviour. I suppose you will tell us all about your sexual practices in your next reply. Spare us, please. (No, really.)
Strange that you mentioned democracy. Because, in that case, the majority wins, and the majority rules. The repeal for Section 377A failed because the majority failed to support it. And the incumbent Exco was tossed out because the majority who were present voted them out. Heads up, “whinefest” is not a synonym for “democracy.”
lonely hairy old man…
Please keep your sexual fantasies out of this discussion. You are not helping your “sistas” here.
BTW, I’m a straight female (this is my husband’s computer). You should be ashamed of yourself, intimidating a petite female with thinly-veiled threats of stalking and possible violence. There ought to be laws against such behaviour.
Apparently there is now a request to convene an extraordinary general meeting of AWARE to consider a motion of no-confidence in the newly-elected Exco, as reported by CNA.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/422301/1/.html
I wonder if the new Exco can somehow jam this meeting on procedural grounds. That would depend on how AWARE’s rules of procedure are structured. I know very little about such matters, but I would suspect, given the ease with which the new Exco got in, that the rules aren’t very robust. Perhaps someone who is an active member and who is familiar with AWARE’s constitution or working methods can shed some light on this.
In any case, I would also add that this whole incident (which is still unfolding) should serve as a wake-up call for NGOs to tighten their constitutions or working methods. They might want to think about sensible measures such as the following:
(a) Need for a sufficiently high quorum before AGMs can take place
(b) More stringent criteria to fulfil before new members are given the right to vote
(c) Exco candidates to submit their candidatures in writing at least one month before the elections
(d) Hold an interactive Q&A so that members can assess the credibility and vision of candidates
(e) Mandatory consultation between incoming and outgoing Exco to maintain continuity during transition
Just some ideas that popped into my head while reading this.
hi mathia, i can’t help but begin to worry again (pls pardon me)
In today TODAY Page 4, it is quoted that Ms Caris Lim said “I am very disillusioned. I don’t like what’s going on, so I am walking out”.
This is worrying. What actually happened here? What made her to make such comments?
Back to the gay issues, I don’t understand why people are worry about this at this time. I am more worry for the new exco to use their religious belief as a selection criteria in all their future works. Will it happen one day that anyone receive help from AWARE will be rejected if she is not from the religion that most new exco members belong to?
hi mathia, to support my point above, pls refer to this URL >> http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/forum/2005/forum_letters/20051025a.pdf
it happened before and it does happens now and then. will AWARE objective be changed with the new exco on board.
this is my main concern. thanks.
“First they came for the gay and lesbians…. I did not speak up as I was not one….
And then they came for the abortion doctors… I did not speak up as I was not one….
And then they came after adulterers… I did not speak up as I was not one….
And Then they came for ME (an unbeliever)… And there were no one left to speak up….”
Hear hear
[...] Feminists But Sectarian Fundamentalists: And They’ll Come For You Too [Recommended] – Mathia Lee: The AWARE AGM 2009 — my personal take: beware of ST – Where Bears Roam Free: Gays now facing a backlash from their own doing? – Unwired Precipitations: [...]
Please see the latest post
http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/aware-agm-2009-eogm-may-2nd-do-something/
MonoGrizzly said, on April 15, 2009 at 6:16 pm
“BTW, I’m a straight female (this is my husband’s computer). You should be ashamed of yourself, intimidating a petite female with thinly-veiled threats of stalking and possible violence. There ought to be laws against such behaviour.”
It doesn’t matter whether you’re a man or a woman. If you say something, you’d best be prepared to take the consequences for it.
If you want to have a say like men do, expect to take the heat like men do. Please don’t hide behind your gender. You will not be taken seriously if you do.
[...] and felt that it was premature to make accusations about their alleged anti-gay stance, including Mathia Lee, who had attended the [...]
[...] The AWARE AGM 2009 — my personal take: beware of STMathia Lee [...]