Last week, immediate past-president of AWARE and three time president, Constance Singam resigned her position as AWARE adviser. In a letter to Aware members, she stated that she is “unable to support, participate, in or sanction the new approach” of the new committee.
We publish the letter below.
AWARE will be holding an EGM to conduct a vote of no-confidence in the new executive committee on May 2. Those interested in becoming members can sign up here.
Dear AWARE member,
These past few weeks have been difficult for me, as you can imagine. You all know of my long-term commitment to AWARE and AWARE’s objectives. In AWARE we have created a space where everyone is welcome; where everyone is respected whatever their choice in life; where I have made life-long friends. But I find myself unable to support, participate in or sanction the new approach of the 2009 Executive Committee of AWARE. I have therefore submitted my resignation from the EXCO as Immediate Past President.
I am writing this email to explain to the AWARE members whose email addresses I have in my personal computer why I have resigned from the EXCO.
The AWARE Constitution states that the immediate past president shall be on the EXCO as an adviser. Members of the 2009 EXCO referred to me as a ‘rock’ and ‘the foundation’, and a source of continuity and point of reference to AWARE’s history and culture. But at the first two meetings of the 2009 EXCO, when I offered my advice on a number of issues it was ignored.
I was particularly unhappy that my advice on the subcommittee chairs was totally disregarded. When the EXCO proposed to replace all subcommittee chairs with EXCO members, I protested and said it was AWARE’s long-standing practice to give more women, especially young women, the opportunity to acquire leadership skills and empowering them through experiences in sub-committee work. I reminded them that the coordinators have been working on these issues for some time and that summarily replacing them would be disrespectful and counter-productive. But EXCO ignored my advice.
The removal of the chair of the CEDAW Committee, Braema Mathi, is especially disturbing as Braema is the Singapore expert on CEDAW. Her work on CEDAW is respected internationally and there is arguably no better person in Singapore to lead the effort to produce the CEDAW shadow report. Yet, she was dismissed summarily without any stated reasons or even a simple thank you.
I am also very concerned about the possible ideological opposition of many members of the 2009 Executive Committee to AWARE’s historic fundamental values. The possible opposition to these values, or at least a lack of understanding of them, was obvious at the AGM when these new members failed to affirm Aware’s values. Several times those who were standing for election were asked to declare their understanding of feminism and the objectives of AWARE. The responses were, at best, non-committal.
Our values, which are the essence of this organization, are based on the fundamental rights and responsibilities of women as women. These include being treated as informed individuals capable of choice; being deserving of opportunities equal to those of men in education, marriage and employment; and being able to control their own bodies, particularly with regard to sexual and reproductive health. Upholding and promoting these values is at the core of AWARE, and I expect
members who want to serve on the EXCO, particularly as office bearers, to understand and support this.
What the EXCO said in the press release issued on 15th April was a sharp contrast to the behavior of many of its members at our internal EXCO meetings. In their public statement the EXCO said: “The New Team at AWARE wishes to remember and honour the work of past AWARE members for their vision and endeavours to advance the cause of women in all areas of society through advocacy and community work.” But in private meetings the EXCO showed a complete lack of respect for me, ignoring my advice and even keeping me out of an EXCO meeting when I had the right to be there as stated in the constitution.
News coming to light each day adds to my concern about the intentions and ability of the EXCO to lead AWARE. I was shocked to read the statements made by DBS in the last two days about the conduct of the new AWARE president, Josie Lau. DBS said – “We are disappointed that Josie knowingly disregarded DBS’ staff code of conduct twice. Such an attitude is not one that DBS, or any other organisation, can condone in a leader.” AWARE certainly should not.
I was even more concerned by the reports that Josie led the marketing team in DBS’s credit card campaign last year which supported the evangelical Christian organisation Focus on The Family. And this morning I discover in the media that Josie, Charlotte, Jenica, Maureen, Sally and Irene apparently attend the same church. AWARE is a secular organisation that embraces diversity of race, age, religion, culture and sexuality, and it must remain so. I am not at all confident that the current EXCO intends to ensure this.
Though I am resigning from the EXCO I remain committed to AWARE and its work, and I hope you will too. AWARE’s values and its work over the last 25 years are important for Singapore and we must do all we can to ensure it continues to be a voice for women in Singapore and a champion of diversity, tolerance and transparency.
Yours sincerely,
Constance Singam
—-
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Constance Singam:
>I was even more concerned by the reports that Josie led the marketing team in DBS’s credit card campaign last year which supported the evangelical Christian organisation Focus on The Family. And this morning I discover in the media that Josie, Charlotte, Jenica, Maureen, Sally and Irene apparently attend the same church. AWARE is a secular organisation that embraces diversity of race, age, religion, culture and sexuality, and it must remain so. I am not at all confident that the current EXCO intends to ensure this.
>>
Ms Singam has repeated that this is not gay vs Christianity. Why then her mention about the new committee’s involvement in FOTF?
Personally, I feel that Constance Singam should have quietly rallied the rest of the 400+ current membership behind her. By mentioning the new members’ affiliation and stand on gay issues, this has turned into a gay vs Christian issue.
In the meantime, I feel that the public call for ladies to support the old exco may backfire.
http://wherebearsroamfree.blogspot.com/2009/04/public-call-to-join-aware-may-backfire.html
that the exco members are mostly from the same church and what this may mean with respect to their policies and ideals?
Saying that this is not gays vs christianity does not negate the need to know/mention the backgrounds of the new exco. This applies to previous AWARE presidents and members.
My concern is that the new EXCO may destroy the existing records and/or data such that even if a totally new committee is formed next year, AWARE would have lost all its 20+ years of effort.
Sorry, I know the above statement is being presumptious. Nevertheless, I do not trust Christians when they get carried away about their specific interpretation of the bible.
Don’t be a sore loser. Like LKY’s advice to the opposition: Get 6 good and capable candidates, form a team, contest and capture a GRC and from there you can build up a credible opposition to the PAP. So, the same go for C Singam: form a good team and win back your positions. Very simple. Easiler than fighting against the PAP.
Another question I have is, since most of the new EXCO are from the same church, why can’t they work by forming a separate public-outreach group from within their church. Why must they overtake AWARE in such a warfare like manner? It is a shame. It speaks volumes of the attitude of the new EXCO’s approach to conflict.
This whole fiasco is turning into a joke on women. As a outsider, I wonder why the old members are crying over foul milk when YOU COULD NOT EVEN BE BOTHERED TO TURN UP FOR AGM?
The new team is voted in fair and square and the politicking the old guards are doing showed how miserable, petty and narrow minded they are to take this to the media. Who knows if the reporters are reporting freely and objectively; or simply publishing their side of the story?
Question: Let’s say that the old grow is pro-homosexual and the new group is anti. What wrong with that? Shall we also go into pro-choice or anti-abortion discussion as well? Is the position of these view engraved into AWARE’s constitution that it should not be challenged or changes?
Bottom line.. if you do not wish your group’s direction to change (which I think it is legitimate and fair) and you REALLY, TRULY care; then TURN UP at your own freaking AGM to vote in the exco.
Btw.. I do not trust our ST. They sensationalize the news and I have first hand experience on how out of whack their report can be.
Salary of fresh grads in banking – overstated
Rental prices of property – overstated
Economy – under reported
Politics – one sided
Enough said.
[---deleted by TOC moderator---]
for the record, i strongly disapprove of josie coup, and her obvious flip flopping on Talking point.
but please for the sake of our country lets not turn this into a sectarian issue.
Why is Ms Singam turning this whole saga into a religious debate and dragging the church in? The fundamental issue should be whether Ms Singam could by means of reason and serious popular support from both new and old guard AWARE members regain political control. If she believed her grouses are justified and her position is right, she should not have resigned. Stick to your convictions. Stop your innuendoes. Anyway, EGOM should provide some clue whether the “people” are with her.
To call it a gay vs Christian issue would be to trivialize some rather disturbing trends in recent years. On the surface it may be the same pro-choice/pro life debate played out between small groups of people who just can’t agree. But what we should ask is, is this a sign of a well organized group of people who see taking over groups of some political influence to fulfill some religious agenda at the expense of the beliefs of everyone else?
I’m not speaking as a liberal – being close to taking the final steps into the Christian faith, I would naturally belief in certain Christian values. But the last thing I want is the sort of culture wars we see now in the States. Our society can’t afford that. And what’s happening over at AWARE is something that anyone who believes in the diversity of opinions and the secularity of political institutions should be worried about.
to dont make it sectarian,
It is a sectarian issue alright. Call a spade a spade. Disguising the issue under more harmonious names does not make more right or wrong too. The fundamentalists need to be dealt with severely.
smallvice_585,
Your comment has been removed. Please refrain from posting such comments.
don’t make it sectarian,
The first part of your comment in response to smallvice has also been removed.
Lets not be hypocritical, all of us are fundamentalists in our own deep beliefs and thinking more than we dare to admit…both pro-gay and anti-gays! So stop the quarrel and get back to basics. In Singapore, all have a place in society and we all could be more tolerant. The gays are not doing themselves a favour by attacking the so-called conservatives.
I personally do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren why two men (or two women) are kissing or why are both parents of the same sex. Still, like most Singaporeans, who though much preferred normal gender and hetrosexual lifestyle are, equally, not homophobic towards our gay compatriots.
Why is theonlinecitizen removing smallvices comment on protecting secularism? The Church has hijacked the American Congress. We cannot let the same thing happened in Singapore. Even Jesus Christ himself said “Give God what is His due, Give Cassar what is his due”..
The old committee was unfocused. They strayed into non women issues. What has gay got to do with a women organisation? Focus on women and there are plenty for them to focus. The old women deserved to be ousted
smallvice_585,
Your comment about secularism was removed because of the context in which it was written.
If AWARE is not an advocacy organisation, then I would have no problem with the takeover.
This takeover is a call for concern because past Presidents of AWARE have been appointed as NMPs and I see it as my national responsibility to seek that no organised religion has a voice in Parliament. Protecting secularism is every Singaporean”s responsibility.
Eh…thought the lady Thio is like somewhat already closely related to the new exco people…so do they feel the need to use AWARE’s platform to promote one of their own as a new potential NMP?
The big fuss about FOTF relations was because Aware wants to work with women from all religious backgrounds, and if you bothered to spend 5 minutes looking up the damn organization you would realise how insensitive and inappropriate it is for people who support that organization with full knowledge, to be helping women from non-Christian backgrounds. Not even touching issues of abortion and such…
There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a devout Christian while heading AWARE. But if your background tends towards less liberal beliefs that would hinder your assistance to women out there (believe me, many people don’t realise how small little acts of insensitivity brought about by certain backgrounds matter) it is just not practical, and not efficient thanks to AWARE’s change in image.
And if you were to say they went to certain churches, wrote certain letters and hooked up with certain organizations but weren’t fully aware of the implications and controversies linked with those things – that’s even worse, they’re not even culturally/socially sensitive enough to be hanging around on excos of “soft” organizations!
I fully believe Constance and the others would’ve been willing to give the new exco the benefit of the doubt even with their background if they didn’t commit so many unbelievable faux pas. You don’t say “no comment” lightly. Forget your views on homosexuality, do you even know what you’re doing? And if we were to believe the accounts of how they treat the old members…
Yet despite all this I cannot honestly believe AWARE members should feel victimized in the least bit – you all underestimated the importance of voting, having been brought up in this place where everything is a walkover, right? NOW you know. It is incredible how people just let this happen. No pain, no gain. Let that be a lesson to every organization out here. You have to fight for your rights! Good luck.
As a female in Singapore, I am concerned over the removal of AWARE’s CEDAW section. The real losers in this controversy are the women in Singapore.
http://www.aware.org.sg/?page_id=57
Extracted from the above: Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) is a United Nations convention which seeks to end gender discrimination. Adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly, it is often described as an international Bill of Rights for women… local NGOs like AWARE submit CEDAW Shadow Reports, offering additional insight into the lives of women.
My circle of acquaintances includes both fundamental Christians and LGBTs.
I know one of the new Exco members personally. I shall not name names. She is an inquisitive and intelligent lady. One can discuss much openly with her and she can agree to disagree cordially when differences occur. However when it comes to areas where her brand of Christianity pre-defines “the right way” (and interpreted by the church’s teachings to apply to everyone, not just those belonging to that church), she is a different person. Yes, I would classify her as a fundamental Christian. Another impression I have of her church is that of stealth in its modus operandi. E.g. I have received innocuous invites in the past to join her church activities or support a cause promoted by the church, which upon digging deeper is really something else.
Why did the new Exco hide their association with their church if they are not proud of their brand of Christianity? With this controversy, they are really tarnishing the good reputation of the moderate Christian majority, in the same way that the Muslim extremists tarnish the good name of the moderate Muslim majority.
20) “Why did the new Exco hide their association with their church if they are not proud of their brand of Christianity? ”
Because they know that the majority of people give them a wide berth once they know the kind of ‘Christianity’ they practice. They have come to realize hard sell doesn’t work. Even a church that was once labelled by the media as a cult has changed its tactics. I was approached by two members not too long ago on the pretext of a free screening of a movie that has ‘relevance’ to my age. It took some probing from me before the members revealed they were from a church, and even further probing to reveal which church. The irony of course, is when they were all friendly to me to get me to attend the ‘movie’ for which they refuse to divulge any more information, they weren’t too friendly with the dude who was also at the same time asking me to donate to a genuine cause, telling him rather curtly to take his turn.
Groups like these, with their ‘ends-justify-the-means’ mentality scare me.
This fiasco has definitely discredited AWARE. One thing i dont understand however is, (no discrimination whatsoever) if the gay groups would like to promote their beliefs and freedom of sexuality, why cant the other side, Christians, conservatives, whoever else, promote their cause for a healthy family nucleus ? Its interesting now that our country is already in a baby deficit, by allowing a same sex society would be disastrous on the logical sense. But then again, i fully stand by the fact that sexual orientation aside, we are all Singaporeans and should come to a common understanding of resolving issues.
Which church is it?
I tot Constance had gd grounds for being upset until the third last and second last paras. Sounded too much like PAP at GE time for my taste.
Now if everyone in new exco from same organisation, there could be grounds for suspicion. But even then so what, per se.
Next will Constance be saying that all the exco members and those who voted them in are Christians? And that therefore there was a Christian conspiracy?
The sacking of sub committe heads is grounds for calling EGM. Leave it at that.
“Old guard”. Use yr brains, not yr hearts. You got gd ground to call EGM. Don’t get into opponents motives and associations. You end up sounding like PAP on campaign trail.
Focus on their actions.
Oh I tot president’s willingness to risk her day job, commendable. Does a lot more for the CAUSE than all the old guard whinging in media.
Balls of brass, if she were a man.
And Constance wrong to criticise her.
Declaration of interest — I know and have high regard for Beemer. I also asked my wimmin friends to join AWARE after the media carried the stories.
But I find the attacks on so-called motives distasteful. Likewise the attempt to bring in religion. Constance and the wimmin could be right, but unless they have evidence that can stand up in court or in hall of public opinion, they shld not resort to these.
It demeans yrself.
“Protecting secularism is every Singaporean’’s responsibility.“: 18) smallvice.
Nope! Definitely No! Protecting pluralism is every Singaporean’s responsibility, not, secularism.
This Singham woman is talking nonsense right from the first paragraph of her letter. She said: “In AWARE we have created a space where everyone is welcome; where everyone is respected whatever their choice in life; But I find myself unable to support, participate in or sanction the new approach of the 2009 Executive Committee of AWARE.“.
She contradicts herself in one sentence. Is she respects the choice of the members who had voted, why then is she unable to support, participate or sanction the new approach of the new team?.
What else can we say about her and the positions of the old guards, sour grapes and nothing else.
In response to #22 Michael on April 20th, 2009 6.08 am:
http://www.straitstimes.com/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=66885cdb0f4b0210VgnVCM100000430a0a0aRCRD&vgnextchannel=4e60758920e39010VgnVCM1000000a35010aRCRD
or
http://blog.alicecheong.com/?p=411
“Asked if their takeover was a planned coup, Ms Lau said: ‘No.’ She and Ms Ong claimed they had only just got to know each other”
Incredulous – Both are from the same Church and outspoken people from the Same Church.
Explain yourself !!!!!!!!
What kind of world are we living in today.
Definition taken Wikipedia
“Honesty is the value of speaking truth and creating trust in minds of others. This includes all varieties of communication, both verbal and non-verbal. Honesty implies a lack of deceit. A statement can be strictly true and still be dishonest if the intention of the statement is to deceive its audience. Similarly, a falsehood can be spoken honestly if the speaker actually believes it to be true.”
she has too many baggages…just a typical old woman scorned…bragging about past glories…blah blah blah…anyway…we have yet to hear from the other side!
28) blackfeline the other side are no better see my comment 26) 27)
I like to know what the frequent poster, Peace, means by the old exco having gone into “non-women issues”. If you are referring to sexual orientation, do remember that gays include lesbians as well. Criminalizing homosexuality denotes exclusion of our lesbian sisters. There are other faiths which are not as interested in penalising the “sin”. The respect of diversity is the core rock of AWARE’s values, and arguably that of Singapore society. Bashing the old guard is pointless, because the new one has clearly neither understood nor carried forth this basic value.
Constance’s letter has exposed the ideological approach of the new Exco, for all members and non-members to see. If AGM attendance rate and responses have been lacklustre, it could be due to members’ complacency that AWARE’s fundamental values will be continued. But the current situation should not be allowed to progress without moderation. The new Exco should be asked not to step down, but firm up their commitment to the organization’s longstanding mission. As reiterated, it is pointless to bash old members for their negligence, because this incident should make them more aware of the need to inculcate new members.
I don’t quite see a gay vs Christianity in Constance’s letter or the issue at large. The concern is mainly for the new Exco to assure that its approach will be considerate of the multi-cultural and multi-racial facets of our society.
gemami,
Pluralism? You oppose the separation of religion and the state? How can pluralism exist without secularism providing the foundation?
It doesn’t seem accurate at all to describe the split as sectarian. Those interviewed who were sympathetic to old Aware seem to come across all races and religions. Its past committee members include staunch Christians, Buddhists, Catholics and Muslims. And the president nominated by Constance Singam who stepped down is a devout Christian. Is there similar diversity in the new Exco?
It seems that the divide is between those who believe in a moderate and inclusive approach versus those who do not.
Based on the CNA interview last night, it would also seem that the divide is between those who have given serious thought to women’s issues and have the knowledge versus those who have not bothered to do so and can only talk in vague and uncertain generalities when asked.
The new Exco has a hidden agenda. One belief only !
Did anybody notice Josie’s claim that she only took up the president’s post after everybody rejected it, hence making her look like a reluctuant recipient of the post, who had it forced upon her by circumstance?
But in DBS’ statement, Josie had told them the AFTERNOON of the ex-co meeting that she intended to run for the Presidency, a request which DBS rejected…which means she knew before the ex-co meeting that she wanted to run!
tut tut liar liar pants on fire…
To disbelief,
Your views are greatly skewed against the new exco team. I would suggest that you look at this objectively. My company has more than 500 employees and I hardly knew majority of them; some who are working just a couple of desks away.
Do you know every single person in your company? So what is wrong with people from the same church not knowing each other?
Let’s hear the story from both side. Don’t be a sore loser just because your side of the team has lost in a game you designed.
When your angry and frustrated, you make comments that run high with emotions. Sometimes, these words will come back to haunt you.
My advice.. vote them out but do not resort to slandering.
33) josie liar
Yes ! dishonest in many of her statements, and timeline on the events incorrect, never check herself, her employer can allow lack of credibility without prohibiting or opposing this type of behaviour or permit it without censure.
Where is the credibility ! Totally lacking in charater. I will not put my trust in this type of person.
33) josie liar on April 20th, 2009 9.11 am
I agree with you. Josie did tell her employer DBS that she was aiming for the top post as reported in TODAY Fri Apr 17,2009 front page. Looks like it was a collaborated attempt by her group of friends to decline presidency and letting her to take the post – since most of the EXCO are from the same church. Josie and Maureen are lying in front of TV audience. Where is your credibility.
Know your enemy. Wikipedia has a good entry on the development of the Christian fundamentalist political movement crusading into our lives imposing their way of lives on others.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjUgzMaN6cY
as for the part about honesty.
3min 40 second to 3min 50 second.
same church, didn’t know each other until working.. “left unsaid”
They don’t know each other even though 5 exco and president happen to attend the same church. ;)
no coup, not planned.
For newly registered members who want details of AWARE EGM:
http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/aware-agm-2009-eogm-may-2nd-do-something/
Please register your intention to attend the EGM with manager@aware.org.sg by 22nd Apr
From January – March of this year, AWARE’s membership increased by over 100 members. Many of the new members submitted applications on photocopied forms, suggesting they had been given out at a large meeting. These new members showed up en mass at AWARE’s Annual General Meeting on March 28 and voted themselves in nine of twelve Executive Committee positons. They now hold the majority and decision-making power.
None of these women had volunteered with AWARE before. When asked of their opinions on feminism their responses were noncommital. When asked about their plans for the future of AWARE, they also had little to say.
Several are members of a very anti-gay church and have been public about their hostility towards gays. Rumor has it that this takeover was stragetically planned because AWARE is an open and welcoming place for women, regardless of class, race, or sexuality.
In the little time these women have been in charge of AWARE, they have fired the highly respected chairs of several important subcommittees. These subcomms were conducting research for the United Nations and for Singapore, and now that research is in danger.
Provides a summary and some interesting details on the intrigue of the new Exco meetings and actions.
http://singapurakini.wordpress.com/2009/04/19/3-hectic-weeks/
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/314556.asp
http://singsupplies.com/showthread.php?t=24209&page=6
Extract from above:
Ms Claire Nazar told Today, it became clear after the exco’s first meeting that they “were not going to follow my direction”. “The exco and I didn’t see eye to eye. It was unfortunate. It was pointless for me to carry on as I didn’t want to waste time in politicking.”
For instance, she wanted the current sub-committee chairs to retain their posts; the others felt differently. And, when she wanted to release a statement saying she would focus on working mothers during her one-year term, the exco “wanted to deliberate another week”.
Based on the above, it seems that Ms Claire Nazar has led in the Trojan Horse for her own autocratic support, but left when it backfired against her. It is sad, because impact on AWARE goes beyond these ladies’ politics. It affects the women in Singapore.
#disbelief
My only issue with Josie and he pussycats…most of them are bougeois..living the high life…probably out of touch with the ground. Stupid women playing their silly game!
[ Another question I have is, since most of the new EXCO are from the same church, why can’t they work by forming a separate public-outreach group from within their church. Why must they overtake AWARE in such a warfare like manner? }
The Hokkien term "chow kuan" comes to mind. Other likely reasons:
- instant awareness and marketing noise
- access to funds built up over man years
- tap existing linkages with UN and other bodies
- build awareness of their church
Watching from the sideline as event unfoils is interested. First Raffles Town Club, then NKF, then RenCi, then Catholic Church, then New Creation Church, now AWARE. These are in line with the PAP policies of total control of all sector of the society to fall into line with the PAP draconian and dictatorial policies of “nibbing in the bud”. Believe it or not!
Looking forward to a good fight if there is courage and conviction on both camps.
Hope we are not let down by all the flames that have been stroked, the anger, immaturity , sulking exposed, the lobbying the is presently going on even with students to unseat a legitimately elected ex-co. Hope that there is no retreat. now for the old committee
Hope that lies if any are also exposed and the gulity party exposed.
Everyone wants to be the boss inside them. Newcomer want to show off. Old ones cannot let go and still think they are somebody.
Respect – it must be earned not claimed.
One of these days, when the opposition wins the general election through their intelligence, doggedness, clear vision and hard work and before they can even form a cabinet – and there you are – they are accused of being liars, funded by foreign agencies, parochial in their thinking etc etc etc. And re-election must be held immediately. Unless of course the PAP should be in power forever .
41) matrix on April 20th, 2009 10.02 am
This is the problem with all these people and PAP
They all underestimate the Intelligence (information gathering) of Singaporeans.
Keeping quiet does’nt mean the people are retards
37) WeC on April 20th, 2009 9.29 am
I guess the truth hurts !
BTW i a male, with no interest in AWARE until the dirty linen hang out to dry 3 weeks ago.