- By Sylvia Tan –
After being verbally abused and asked to leave a club for a second time in months, a transgender performance artist and two other transgender women have taken a stand and launched a campaign to end discrimination against their community.
Marla Bendini Junior Ong, a 24-year-old first-year Art, Design & Media student was thrown out of a popular nightspot on Clarke Quay last Wednesday. And for what reason? She’s a transgender woman, and there appears to be a “no transgenders” policy at the club called China One and at several other clubs in the Clarke Quay area, a popular entertainment district along Singapore River.
Prominent transgender activist Leona Lo was similarly asked to leave The Pump Room, a club located in the same area one night in November 2007. She told Fridae at the time that she was called a ‘lady boy’ by a bouncer and had refused to show him her ID although it states her gender as female. Not one to back down easily, Lo who runs her own public relations consultancy and author of From Leonard to Leona – the first transsexual autobiography to be published in Singapore, went to the press with her offer to conduct a workshop on gender diversity for the bouncers and managers of the establishment. Unsurprisingly, the club did not take her up on her offer. Ever since the incident which was reported by Fridae and local mainstream media outlets, Lo said she has received numerous emails from transgender women in Singapore about their experiences from being thrown out of clubs to discrimination in the workplace and other areas of life.
Tricia Leong, a transgender woman in her fifties, was fired from her a graphic designer job in an advertising firm 12 years ago when she began transitioning (presenting herself as female). She hasn’t been able to find permanent employment since then and has to support herself with her savings.
The three women on Wednesday launched Sisters in Solidarity, the first-ever campaign in Singapore to end discrimination against transgender women, at a media event held at Food #03.
Last Wednesday, Marla who was with her pole dancing group – some of whom were hired to perform at ChinaOne but was herself not scheduled to perform that night – was escorted out of the club by a bouncer who told her that the club’s manager wanted to speak to her outside. As the manager did not show up, she reentered the club although she was stopped by the bouncer. Despite her studio director’s intervention and explanation that she’s part of the group, the bouncers were adamant that she left the club. That was the second occasion she was asked to leave; a similar incident involving the same club occurred in September last year.
Upon her exit, she found the club managers in a heated argument. The club’s senior manager who was identified by Marla as Lawrence started to yell at her and said that she should not step into ChinaOne again. (Read Marla’s account here.)
Although Lawrence of ChinaOne did not respond to Lo’s invitation to share his side of the story at the press conference, he responded to her email yesterday saying that it is one of his club’s policies that it does not allow “transgenders especially on our ladies night, provided that their change is reflected in their photo ID card” which means to say that pre-operative transgender women are barred from his club. In Singapore, only post-operative transgenders can have their ‘new’ gender reflected in their identity cards (but not their birth certificates) and passports.
“What is alarming is the club operators are targeting transgender women at random and verbally abusing, publicly humiliating and throwing out those they perceive as transgender, based on physical attributes such as large hands, angular jaw lines, low voices and other such stereotypical assumptions. When in doubt, they then use the gender status on the identity card as a crude measure of ‘acceptability’ and as a passport to entry.” Lo, a Founding Working Group member of the Asia-Pacific Transgender Network, said in a statement.
Should the clubs decide to continue to bar pre-operative transgender women and require transgender women to show their IDs to prove their ‘status’, Lo demands that they publicise their door policy so that patrons (both transgender and non) can make informed decisions about the establishments they patronise.
“If you choose to discriminate against transgender women, be brave enough to post a sign, publish it prominently on your door, so people can choose whether they want to support your club,” she told the roomful of reporters.
Lo has since also written to the CapitaLand, which owns and manages Clarke Quay, to ask that they investigate the incidents and to end the discriminatory practices.
ChinaOne and CapitaLand did not respond to emails from Fridae by the time of publication.
————-
Social enterprise initiative
Organisers also announced the launch of a social enterprise project where companies can log on to endtransgenderdiscrimination.wordpress.com to view a listing of professional services by transgender women. Lo says she hopes for the project serves as a “platform for supportive employers to engage the services of and even recruit transgender women who may otherwise find it difficult to find employment by virtue of their gender identity.”
Sisters in Solidarity activities 2010
SIS petition
Organisers aim to collect 1,000 signatures for their petition that calls for an end to all forms of discrimination against transgender women in Singapore. The petition and a cover letter will be sent to any organisation/institution reported to have discriminated against transgender women here.
Date: Sat, May 8, 2010
Time: 2 to 6pm
Venue: Food #03, 107+109 Rowell Road
Fundraising
As the campaign is currently funded by the organisers, 1,000 Sisters in Solidarity badges designed by Marla will be available for sale at Food #03, Rowell Road at $2 each. All proceeds after production costs will fund future SIS activities. Part of the proceeds will be donated to Post-Museum (which operates Food #03).
Exhibition: Conversations between father and son by Marla Bendini
Conversations is a multimedia installation performance with paintings, paying tribute to the artist’s late father.
At the opening on May 13, the host will deliver the address followed by a performance by Marla Bendini after the reception. There will be a sale of SIS collaterals. Action for AIDS will also support with collaterals for HIV and AIDS awareness.
Opening Reception
Date: May 13, 2010
Time: 6.30pm til late, performance by Marla Bendini 7.30pm
Venue: The Substation Gallery
Exhibition runs from 13-22 May 12pm-9pm daily
SISter Carnival/Flea-market
Details to be confirmed/announced soon.
————-
Sylvia Tan is the editor of Fridae.com, Asia’s largest gay and
lesbian website.
The article is republished with permission.
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
Yung
Transgender and LGBT should know themselves that the moment they choose to live an alternative lifestyle from the mainstream, they should be prepared to be discriminated, and people who do not subscribe to their alternative lifestyle have the right to express their disapproval.
disapproval, yes.
I cough, regardless of whether I inhale second hand smoke to express my disapproval of people who smoke.
disapproval translated into action, no.
Should I take a 4 meter pole, and point it at the smoker, making sure he stay that far from me? If we were walking towards each other, I should have no qualms about poking him and pushing him out of the way?
p.s The article is talking about the latter here.
Lobo76 and all the rest,
-
Take a look at Jonny’s last post. I think he said it all there is to say. He has convinced people like me, beyond a reasonable doubt, why we have to continue to do what we have to do.
-
Tell me your opinion, if you will, over the comments he had made. I’d definitely like to hear all your views.
gemami
He has convinced people like me, beyond a reasonable doubt, why we have to continue to do what we have to do.
Some elaboration might be nice? i.e How has he done so?
-
Tell me your opinion, if you will, over the comments he had made. I’d definitely like to hear all your views.
Two words, “over idealistic”.
My ‘morals’, amongst other things, is to judge people with as little preconception as possible. By removing the label of gender, one would be one step further in removing preconception, thus it is an ‘ideal’ for me.
Like I mentioned (in another thread), idealism has to be tempered with realism. With the majority still divided as either male or female, and their behavior still generally guided by the society (huge inertia), I feel it is one step too far too fast.
Maybe one day we will all have unisex toilets like those in Ally McBeal, with one additional touch: there will be urinals for men to use, and the women have no issues with it.
BUT, I don’t think that day is here yet. =)
Lobo76,
-
There is hope yet for you. You speak of realism in the same breath as idealism, forgetting that the reality of the situation is not the ideal of that which you desire.
-
Let us see things in your perspective, in the context you have described here, and look closely at both reality and ideality.
-
Reality = Majority. Do you agree with this equation?
Ideality = Minority i.e. what the minority hope for is what they ideally want. Do you agree with this equation?
The minority is using idealism to fight the majority with the aim of changing reality. Is this true?
To digress a wee bit, I think Singapore has already made a mistake by allowing post-op transgenders to change their gender to female on their I/Cs. I wonder what’s stopping a man from accidentally engaging in intercourse or even marrying such a person thinking it is female. I mean, we shouldn’t judge that a woman could have been a man based on large hands, adam’s apple, deeper voice etc. right? I normally don’t stop to ask a woman for her BC, do you?
gemami,
Reality = Majority. Do you agree with this equation?
Though I am sure that it is not always true, I sort of understand where you are coming from, so ‘yes’.
-
Ideality = Minority
Nope. This is totally wrong. Ideality (I assume you mean THE ideal) should be no minority nor majority. Everyone is equal.
-
The minority is using idealism to fight the majority with the aim of changing reality. Is this true?
yes, minority is using idealism (where everyone will be equal) to fight majority.
Lobo76,
-
Great! We are making headway. Since you are so sporting to answer my questions as you did, I shall speak my mind in the hope that you will see clearer where I am coming from.
-
The problem we have here is over the second equation: Ideality = Minority.
-
I agree that the ideal is for everyone to be equal. But because of equation one, this is easier said than done. It is not the fault of any non-ideal minority. It just is.
-
Because of equation one, the majority already feels that the situation is ideal. This is not to say, the majority has no room for accomodating new ideals.
-
Because of equation one, anyone attempting to imbalance it will be seen as one attempting to challenge the norm, the already ideal. Unless, it has a solid ground of contention, anything that does not fit into the already ideal will be tended to with great trepidation and skepticism.
-
Because of equation one, those challenging the already ideal become a group of people who holds secondary views and opinions. Again it is no fault of the minority. It just is.
-
In a world where there will always be an imbalance of ideals, don’t you think you are asking too much of the already ideal majority to make space and room for what they deem as not ideal?
-
I am not saying that the not-so-ideal groups should just shut up and sit down, no, no, no.
-
By all means go ahead and fight for your ideals.
-
What I am suggesting is that when you fight for your ideal, you have to take care to understand the already ideal views of the majority.
-
This is the way to win them over.
-
The least you would want to do is to continue to blare your horns and strike your arms out in protest to demand from the already ideal what you deem as ideal.
I mean, we shouldn’t judge that a woman could have been a man based on large hands, adam’s apple, deeper voice etc. right? I normally don’t stop to ask a woman for her BC, do you?
……………………………
i do.. i merely asked them..what engine you run on? volkwagon or porche?
Gemami,
My thinking is as follows:
First of all, I think you assumed that majority + minority = everybody. However, that is not true. There is a group of people who are not part of ‘everybody’. These people we label as ‘criminals’. The more obvious ones are the thieves, murderers, rapists, etc.
At this point in time, I think the ‘majority’ treats transgender people as ‘criminals’, though a tier above the ‘obvious ones’… I think. Maybe some of the majority even think they are a tier below common criminals. In any case, my point was that they are not even minority yet.
For if they are, and the Ideal (I should think even for the majority) is for ‘everyone’ to be equal. If so,why do they still discriminate against them? No, obviously, transgender fails even to qualify as minority in their eyes.
What they are doing now is to try to qualify themselves as minority. i.e a small group, but one deserving of equal rights.
Thus, your ‘slowing winning them over’ isn’t quite right for them,… until they become minority in the eyes of the majority.
To put things in perspective.
- ‘liberal’ Ang Mohs in Singapore are minority.
- ‘Perverted’ people are not.
The ‘perverted’ people need to be on the same level as liberal Ang Mohs before they can start the slowing-winning-them-over process.
Lobo76,
-
I am beginning to see your pov and can now appreciate better where you are coming from, even though your views, IMHO, may be classified as ‘extreme’. Never the matter, it does bring across more clearly the point you are making.
-
It is true that I think along the line of majority + minority = everybody. I think most people do too. It is the simplest of equation to most, so why do we need to stir it by identifying some others who do not think themselves belonging to, or fall outside, either of these two generic groups?
-
You reasoned that this ‘other’ group came into existence because the majority, and to a lesser extent, the minority, view them as below the Generics. What shall we call them? There is the majority, the minority and … what should it be …. shall we call them the Outcasts, for need of a label?
-
I classified your views ‘extreme’ because you have associated the outcasts with murderers and rapists. I don’t think we should associate transgenders, or the LGBT community, with this group of criminals.
-
This is one thing I observed when the LGBT community wants to push across a point they are always so extreme in defining them.
-
Criminals have to be taken off the generic description of majority and minority for the simple reason that they have proven themselves guilty of disturbing the rules of law. I define criminals as those belonging to the likes of murderers & rapists and not the petty thief. You will also agree that such law and order is necessary to maintain peace for the Generics. We have to be careful, I am suggesting this based on lawful intervention only.
-
Let us now return to the Generic groups. We have defined and identified what constitutes ‘majority’, which is basically, ‘the more of us’. However, we have yet to define and identify the ‘minority’ … or, ‘the less of us’. Who are they?
-
The LGBT is already the minority but yet, you do not realize this, preferring to amplify your argument by saying that they are perceived to be lesser than this. Why? Take it that you are the minority and work yourself up from there.
-
Once you realize this, you will also adjust accordingly and become less confrontational, knowing that you already have a place in society albeit a minority one – (for now?).
Gemami
I classified your views ‘extreme’ because you have associated the outcasts with murderers and rapists.
My point was there there are outcast groups, and used murderers and rapists as examples to show that outcasts do exist. That was why I consistently used inverted commas to bracket the word criminals.
Outcast is a much better term, but well, I didn’t think of the term earlier. Thanks for bringing it out.
-
However, we have yet to define and identify the ‘minority’ … or, ‘the less of us’. Who are they?
I believed this is answered by my example at the end of my last post. Minority (as perceived by the majority) is those few with acceptable but different values. In my previous post, the example given were the liberal ang mohs.
The ‘Outcasts’ then would be those few with unacceptable and different values. The unacceptable values are perceived to be ‘criminal’ (not necessarily in respect to Law).
-
Take it that you are the minority and work yourself up from there.
The first part is answered when I gave my definition of ‘minority’? i.e you have to qualify as minority (values have to be acceptable) first.
The second part is regarding “work yourself up from there”, and “become less confrontational”.
I think there is a stage where confrontation is necessary for the proverbial next step. This is only so much one can do before talking about it openly is necessary. And talking is all what the campaigns in Singapore amounted to.
Maybe you can draw up a roadmap of ‘working yourself up’ with words? What is your alternative to the so called confrontational methods by the transgenders?
You guys are arguing for the sake of arguing. And fighting over terms and definitions.
It does not solve the issue whereby, someone is discriminated just because he or she does not fit what society deem as ‘normal’. And worse, to be treated with less respect.
Why do we have to pass judgement on people at all, just because they are different?
The sad reality is the majority will always overlook the rights of the minority. But that does not give the majority the right to treat the minority as a lesser being.
Well Lobo76, to draw up a road map, both parties will have to work together, beginning by listing down the dos and don’ts. It will never work if the road map is drawn up by one of either party.
-
IMHO, the first Don’t would be the act of confrontation. The article here supports the backlash this will attract. The formation of SIS is arguably a good move for the Sisterhood, but unfortunately the purport of its creation has all the wrong reasons in the kind of ‘values’ it wants to promote. It was formed because a group of transgenders could not pass themselves off as women and is now demanding equal rights as women.
-
This brings us to the other question: Why the need to pass themselves off as women, since the LGBT community finds it necessary to question whether being male and women is all there is to being human? Why not give themselves a name, promote it and work at gaining public acceptance?
-
Perhaps, it will be good for the LGBT to stare himself in the mirror and be less shameful of such definitions as ‘Shim’ or ‘Boirl’ and to stop seeing such terms as being derogatory? This is the first step to accepting the people that they are – if only they can be less offended by such descriptions.
-
Secondly, the problem of acceptance exists because the majority group cannot accept the behaviour and ‘values’ of the minority or the outcasts. It is not limited to the outcasts only but to the minority as well. Very simply, it is a case of majority rules. Even the minority has to continually work at gaining acceptance from the majority, what more the outcasts? This is the truth of the situation and will remain so for a long time yet.
-
An example in Singapore’s context would be ‘secularism’. Many believe and uphold the secular nature of our society, that’s why religious views have to take a backseat when the general welfare of the country is considered. Can the religious then fight for equality with such secular considerations? No, it has to see itself as the minority and to come under the majority rule.
-
The third part of the road map should take its cue from the Women’s Group advocates. We do know that women were, not too long ago, very badly discriminated against as compared to men.
-
How did it make progress to be on par with them in the modern society is what the LGBT can emulate. They are successful because they first of all have a common identity that is not threatening to men. They argued for equality based on their contributions to society. They proved themselves worthy to stand alongside men and have even shown to be better than men on many occasions.
-
Dare I challenge the LGBT community to find ways to make inroads in such a manner?
-
You already have many supporters from the majority group and this is a good start. Make use of them to convince the rest who, understandably, are still very apprehensive toward the LGBT community.
-
Truth be told, people like me have been put off by some of the more flagrant attitudes of the gay to the extent that we associate every one of them with such behaviour. It is wrong, I admit but whose fault is it?
-
So there, you cannot accuse me of not being reasonable. I have commented in the hope that the gay would see himself more clearly the position he is in. The ball is now in your court to either consider what I have shared or to rubbish it as some would definitely do.
Gemami,
(SIS) was formed because a group of transgenders could not pass themselves off as women and is now demanding equal rights as women.
Unless women are not allowed into the club, I would argue that they are demanding equal rights as human beings… It’s how I see it anyhow.
-
Why the need to pass themselves off as women, since the LGBT community finds it necessary to question whether being male and women is all there is to being human? Why not give themselves a name, promote it and work at gaining public acceptance?
1. Transgender is only the T in the LGBT. Which is why I didn’t mentioned the Law against sodomy in my arguments in this thread.
2. The need (or want) to do something is just that. Different people have different needs/wants. Some people need religion, should I be asking why they have that need?
3. On male/female/human, that because that is the nature of the discrimination…
4. Last part is rather vague. Anyway, you already questioned their ‘need’ and ‘discrimination’, so what else is left to promote?
-
Perhaps, it will be good for the LGBT to stare himself in the mirror and be less shameful of such definitions as ‘Shim’ or ‘Boirl’ and to stop seeing such terms as being derogatory?
Tbh, I am unfamiliar with these terms. How would you compare these terms with what ‘nigger’ is to African Americans? Do you supposed that Ts might see it as a ‘nigger’ equivalent?
-
Can the religious then fight for equality with such secular considerations?
But secular consideration INCLUDES religions. It just doesn’t play favourite to any ONE of the religion. If you translate religion to gender, it is exactly what the Ts are asking for. To be ONE of them, and not excluded.
Your point is valid only if it is an atheistic society where religions are discriminated against. e.g you cannot come into my restaurant because you are Christian.
-
The third part of the road map should take its cue from the Women’s Group advocates.
Do you supposed that the first such group that was formed was seen as confrontational by the conservatives?
-
that is not threatening to men.
I doubt the men back then would agree. Even now, I think the Woman’s Charter is ‘threatening’. haha
-
Truth be told, people like me have been put off by some of the more flagrant attitudes of the gay to the extent that we associate every one of them with such behaviour. It is wrong, I admit but whose fault is it?
Haha, THIS, I can definitely identify with. Same thing with me and Christians. Doesn’t mean that I think they should be discriminated against though. In fact, I think T are better because they are not asking for others to become T, only that T should be equal to others.
Lobo76,
-
And so you have proven my point that a road map is as impossible as getting two donkeys to pass each other on the same bridge.
-
There is much to be done if one group is to be accepted by the other.
-
Much more difficult if the approach is as unkind as confrontation.
We need to do a forum this year and invite HR staff of MNC companies to understand more about the transgendered. It would be good to have an anti discrimination clause in MOM guideline for staff employment
I really like your blog.. very nice colors & theme. Did you make this website yourself or did you hire someone to do it for you? Plz reply as I’m looking to create my own blog and would like to find out where u got this from. many thanks
ripoff.they emphasize their customer service and yet, Ive emailed them twice but theres been no response. Youll spend your $75 worth of credits bidding on items that youll NEVER get. Just when you think youre there, when theres one second left on the auction, and youve placed your bid..they immediately raise it to 10 seconds, or whateverand they do that over and over and over.it is a complete waste of money.
Singapore is a backward, narrowminded, ignorant and judgemental society.