Detail Legal Consciousness, Activism and Social Justice: An Analysis of the Impact of Legal Consciousness on Gay Advocacy in Singapore and Malaysia Bibliografi Author: Chua, Lynette J. Topik: Gay Advocacy Bahasa: (EN )     Penerbit: University of California Press     Tempat Terbit: Berkeley    Tahun Terbit: 2007     Jenis: Papers/Makalah Fulltext: Lynette Janice Chua Kher Shing.pdf (69.07KB; 1 download) Abstract In November 2006, the Singapore government announced that it would decriminalize anal sex and oral sex between opposite sexes, but would continue to penalize sexual conduct between men in public or in private, regardless of consent, as “gross indecency.” The most vocal gay activist organization in Singapore openly denounced the blatant discrimination against gays (“Partial Decriminalisation”). A mainstream feminist organization called for the repeal of the “gross indecency” law (“Position Paper”). Around the same time, a group of gay activists launched “Supporting, AFfirming, Empowering our LGBTQ friends and family (SAFE),” a support network for parents, family members and friends of gay and transgender people to help, learn from and share experiences with one another. At the launch of SAFE on December 9, 2006, one of the founders said, “We hope that we can reach out to families who are worried about the lives their gay children will have, who are concerned about what the neighbours might say, who are scared silly that the police will come knocking one day brandishing Section 377A!” (“Launch of SAFE”). The reactions from these organizations that address issues related to homosexuality are perhaps both expected and unexpected. For the vocal gay activist organization, openly attacking anti-gay laws and state practices is what it does. For the mainstream feminist organization, however, the explicit and unequivocal call for the decriminalization of same-sex sexual conduct is a departure for the organization. Under previous leaderships, it was seen as asexual, shying away from issues concerning sexuality, much less homosexuality (Lyons 2004). As for SAFE, the timing of its launch may have been coincidental, but its approach to oppressive, anti-gay laws is typical of other such organizations in Singapore – it chooses to focus inward by providing support to the gay community, instead of confronting the state. Why do these organizations, working within similar political opportunity structures respond differently to changes within the same structures? Why do their activists react to and treat the law differently? Why do some organizations change their responses as their leadership changes? The recent debate over the (de)criminalization of same-sex sexual conduct in Singapore highlights the questions that motivate my research, which I am introducing in my presentation at this conference. This research will form part of my dissertation project, which is being developed. What I am sharing in this presentation will be: (i) the formulation of my research question at this stage; (ii) an explanation of the relevance and importance of my research to legal scholars; (iii) explanations of key theoretical concepts and my preliminary hypothesis by discussing and using as examples some original data collected from a feasibility study conducted in July and August 2006 on location. My goal for this presentation is to obtain feedback from audience members, many of whom are distinguished legal scholars, on my proposed research. Opini Anda Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini! Lihat Sejarah Pengadaan  Konversi Metadata   Kembali

Copyright © 2006, 2007 Unika Atma Jaya, all rights reserved