How have OB markers surrounding the topic of homosexuality evolved over time?Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Out-of-bounds markers, or OB markers, will be defined in this essay as an arbitrary framework that indicates what is permissible for public debate in the Singapore context. Rather than what is stipulated in black and white about what is or is not acceptable, crossing an OB marker is measured based on the degree of offense committed by the state or society, which can only be determined after this offense is expressed. . OB markers are often crossed when an unpopular opinion is aired publicly and is seen as disrupting the integrity of the national consensus on the issue. It can therefore be suggested that a lack of dialogue on the issue of the elephant in the room may suggest its sensitive and, therefore, divisive nature. After all, discussions are almost always expected to end with a definitive conclusion or compromise, something the state or society as a whole wishes to avoid or delay. Homosexuality has been and still is one such issue in Singapore. The position of this essay is that the OB markers surrounding homosexuality in postcolonial Singapore were initially narrow, indicating a similarly narrow and insubstantial discussion on the subject, which may be gleaned from superficial media reports or in the No conversation at all. Later, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, OB markers became more visible thanks to the government's public stance, meaning that although the elephant in the room was addressed, the discussion did not does not necessarily extend to the public and the words of the state seem to be golden. However, in recent years, several factors have contributed to the expansion of OB markers, such as the advent of the Internet, a growing community of pro-LGBT groups, external influences from abroad or even prominent local figures who spoke. This means that the debate on homosexuality in Singapore has gained momentum and OB markers are expanding to accommodate the debate. Postcolonial Singaporean society, whether underexposed or not about homosexuality, had a limited view of the concept of homosexuality. Homosexuality, considered a distant and unnatural sexual lifestyle, was discussed, but the articles did not extend to civic debate on the subject. rights of a homosexual individual. The first considerable mention of Singapore's LGBT community in the news was made by a tabloid newspaper called The New Nation. Its title, “They are different…” with subtitles like “Who are the gays in Singapore?” Our investigative team reveals their lives, problems and attitudes after a 4-month investigation" reveals a tendency of press agents to mystify the subject of homosexuality (first Singapore newspaper article on the LGBT community, nd). Given the implicit consensus that homosexuality was unnatural and against the nature of things, homosexuals themselves preferred to keep to themselves and there were no notable advocacy groups demanding debate or recognition, which meant that there was no pressure to start the conversation. OB markers therefore remained narrowly in line with conservatism for society as a whole and secrecy within the gay community. However, after years, homosexuals became more aware of their lack of rights and recognition within society and questionedquestion this discrimination more and more. public platforms. This sparked a debate about homosexuality in which even the government had a stake. For example, in a 1998 CNN International interview with then-Chief Minister Lee Kuan Yew, an anonymous caller asked him about his lack of rights in the country as a homosexual and a possible future . for people like him, to which Lee responded that Singaporeans are "overall a very conservative and orthodox society", and speaking for the government: "let people live their own lives as long as they don't Don't encroach on others. I mean, we don't harass anyone. » (Lee, KY, 1998). The government's position is most evident in a 2007 parliamentary speech by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, discussing the retention of Section 377A of the Penal Code, which criminalizes anal sex. sex between two consenting men. He claims that "discussion and debate will not bring (polar groups defending opposing causes) together and instead of building consensus, we will divide and polarize our society", suggesting that any further pressure. Openly debating homosexuality rights in the law would harm the stability and peace of the nation. He recognizes that the party was “right to adapt, to welcome homosexuals into our society, but not to allow or encourage activists to defend these rights. gay rights (like) they do in the West. (Lee HL, 2007). The parliamentary speech undoubtedly had the effect of establishing a clear standard for the approach to the subject of homosexuality: as Lee Kuan Yew mentions, the government does not "harass" anyone since the law has been made non-conformist . enforceable, and it becomes something like a unilateral compromise affirmed by the government. By setting a certain tone on what can be tolerated through legislation, Singaporeans' attitudes towards the issue are swayed to accept the status quo, marking the OB markers quite narrowly even though there is a veneer of discussion. In reality, the OB markers surrounding homosexuality go no further than the position of the government of the time. The state-sanctioned Singapore Media Development Authority (MDA) bans the "promotion or glorification of the homosexual lifestyle", which sees legislative restriction of content about homosexuality circulating on media platforms, thereby restricting conversation . Even think of Pink Dot SG, a high-profile event that has taken place almost symbolically every year at Speaker's Corner in Hong Lim Park since 2009. The event has gathered significant support both locally and from businesses foreigners enthusiastic about playing a potential role in breaking Singapore's stubborn position. on homosexuality. The event may promote the right to freedom to love, but this is arguably an understatement, given that the event is after all state-sanctioned. Certainly, the event promotes the debate on same-sex love, inspiring the community to confront the subject of homosexuality. However, another way to look at it would be that the event is another way of compromise between the state and the gay community – the event is not as much a conversation starter, but a place of recreation where the community Gay people are allowed to safely celebrate their existence in society, just as ethnic groups are given public holidays to celebrate their respective cultures. This doesn’t necessarily mean the company wants to party. Recent years have seen a gradual broadening of OB markers, as there is a general willingness to account for or talk about homosexuality in Singapore. InfluencesExternal factors have contributed to this, such as the United States Supreme Court legalizing same-sex marriage in all fifty states in 2015, and more recently, in early September of this year (2018), the Indian Supreme Court took unanimously the decision to repeal the ban on homosexual sex, the same article of the Penal Code that Singapore retains from its colonial heritage. Pro-LGBT groups, excited by this encouraging turn of events, have harnessed their growing influence and voice to demand the same for Singapore's legislation. This has come in the form of petitions, a recently launched constitutional action against 377A by a disc jockey, Mr Johnson Ong, and a host of independent opinion pieces on social media, such as that of Swing Mag, an online gay magazine on Instagram. The nation was then rocked by debate over the issue of repeal, signaling that the OB markers were seriously expanding to accommodate such heated debate. Certainly, some groups, primarily religious and pro-family groups, have fought back, indicating the crossing of a certain OB marker. For example, the anti-LGBT Facebook group Singaporeans Defending Marriage and Family (SDMF) has fiercely rejected the repeal on social media platforms and has done so most vocally among other anti-homosexuality groups. However, other organizations, such as the Catholic Church of Singapore, have taken a more nuanced position that allows for further discussion: Archbishop William Goh has stated that Section 377A "should not be repealed in the current circumstances », referring to the family unit as the foundation of society (Goh, 2018). This suggests recognition of the current debate and does not appear to be deeply offended by the possibility of repeal, but rather participation in the ongoing debate. This willingness to participate is also another strong indicator of the expansion of OB markers, as groups are not afraid to speak out about homosexuality. Moreover, the initiative of prominent and respectable academic figures speaking on the record about homosexuality has effectively increased the relevance of the issue at hand, situating OB markers even broader. Veteran diplomat and professor Tommy Koh argues in an opinion piece that there is a "difference between a sin and a crime" and that as a secular nation, "it is not the business of the State of upholding the dogmas of these religions. In Singapore, there is a separation between religion and state. Church leaders and Islamic leaders should respect this separation. (Koh, 2018). The respect given to Koh has its advantages: his comments are considered logical, even academic, and contribute to the debate without crossing the boundaries of the OB, even if the content of his opinion article could very well offend religious groups in Singapore in a different context. i.e. being mumbled about by a less respected person). To judge the issue of homosexuality and its sensitivity in Singapore, we can turn to the many memes mocking the debacle, but to no consequence: satire is allowed by both the state and society to s 'flourish, which clearly indicates that the scope of OB markers has really expanded since the conversation about it began. Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized article from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Therefore, this essay posits that OB markers have expanded significantly to accommodate the debate over homosexuality in Singapore. Company. Although there are minority groups who fiercely reject even the notion of discussion, they do not.