Year: 2013

AWARE’s Top 10 in 2013

AWARE santa smallOut with the old year and in with the new!  As we plan our work for 2014, we’ve also been thinking about some of AWARE’s most significant achievements in 2013.  Here’s our top 10 list – all thanks to the help and support of our members and friends.

1) We took 3372 Helpline calls from women in need of information and/or support.  The AWARE Helpline, Singapore’s only helpline for women run by women, turned 22 this year, and continued to provide advice, assistance and a listening ear to women all across the island.  Our legal clinic provided free consultations to 248 clients facing challenging personal circumstances, while 178 clients benefited from our counselling services. Finally, our Sexual Assault Befrienders Service (SABS), launched in 2011, remained a vital source of support for victims of sexual assault, assisting 64 women in 2013 through reporting and/or recovery.

2) We made recommendations on population policy. Through submissions to government and media statements, AWARE pushed for the national conversation on policy to focus on human welfare and environmental sustainability, not just economic growth.  Population will almost certainly remain a major focus of debate in years to come, and AWARE will work to keep a gender equality perspective in the political conversation.

we can logo3) We initiated the We Can! campaign.  In May, Singapore became the 16th country to join the We Can! international movement to end violence against women, which empowers individuals and organisations to tackle the root causes of violence in their communities. In just seven months, We Can! has gone from strength to strength, including:

  • Recruiting over 700 Change Makers who pledged to commit to a violence-free life.
  • Encouraging bystander intervention through Would you step in, an inspiring video drawing over 116,000 views in a single month.
  • Sharing everyday stories of violence in Blk 2511, an innovative Facebook app.
  • Drawing 270 visitors to the inaugural We Can! Arts Fest – 89% said the event helped them better understand what they could do to end violence.

4) Paternity leave became a reality.  For years, AWARE has advocated more inclusive family policies, including paternity leave to support shared care-giving and give fathers the opportunity to better participate in family life. This year, our work paid off – fathers are now entitled to one week of paternity leave. Though this is less than we’d asked for, and we still have much to say about the 2013 Parenthood Scheme, it’s a good first step.

5) We pushed for a socially equal national Budget.  In February, we made extensive budget recommendations advocating lifelong comprehensive healthcare, especially for the elderly. (Here’s our press release summary.)  Pleasingly, the Prime Minister’s National Day Rally speech also outlined policy shifts towards more comprehensive healthcare and inclusive housing.  We’re heartened that recognition of these essentials is growing and we will continue to advocate for those in need with Budget 2014.

6) Our supporters celebrated at the Big Red Ball.  Over 350 friends and supporters raised more than $250,000 at our annual fundraising gala to support our work for a more equal society.  Our annual awards honoured pathbreaking icons Constance Singam and Rachel Chung, as well as others who have helped erode gendered barriers in Singapore, while the popular Alamak! award highlighted some egregious examples of sexism in the past year.

updated SHOUT7) We put the need to eradicate sexual harassment on the map.  AWARE has long lobbied to raise awareness of sexual harassment – including collecting over 1,700 signatures on our SHOUT petition.  In November, after consultation with us and others, Minister of Law K Shanmugam announced that the government will strengthen legal protection against harassment by next year.  We will keep the pressure on to ensure that these measures include employer responsibility for ending workplace sexual harassment.

8) We’ve been awarded our first United Nations grant! Specifically, a three-year grant by UN Women’s Fund for Gender Equality, one of the most significant global funds dedicated to women’s economic and political empowerment. Together with our Indonesian partner, Solidaritas Perempuan, AWARE won this grant in a worldwide competition for projects that innovatively advance gender equality and women’s empowerment. Our winning project, “Gender equality is our culture”, aims to train 500 gender advocates to promote the principle that gender equality, in accordance with CEDAW, does not contradict culture. AWARE is working with allies to develop context-appropriate training. Join us to reclaim gender equality within your own culture!

9) Gender equality in the military came under scrutiny.  AWARE pushed once again for a fresh look at gender and the military.  We also successfully persuaded the Ministry of Defence and the Singapore Armed Forces to halt the singing of certain marching song lyrics celebrating sexual violence.  This prompted a much-needed national conversation about the normalisation of sexual violence and the bonding rituals of masculinity – including an entire page of editorials in the Sunday Times.

10) We spoke up for sexual and reproductive autonomy.  AWARE supports the right of every person, especially women, to control our own bodies and fertility.  In 2013 this right came under heavy pressure from pro-natalist and other agendas – including through spreading misinformation.  AWARE vigilantly ensured that the public conversation included a robust defence of reproductive freedom, access to patient-centred medical services including abortion, and full and accurate information about health and sexuality.

Abortion, pregnancy: More accurate information needed

By Jolene Tan, Programmes and Communications Senior Manager, AWARE

Recent letters give an inaccurate picture of the health impact of abortion and pregnancy (“Abortions: Parental consent vital in family-oriented society” by Madam Ang Lay Choo; Forum Online, last Friday, “Why parental consent laws are necessary” by Mr Darius Lee and “Abortions raise maternal mortality risk” by Mr Edmund Leong; Forum Online, both on Nov 28).

littmann-master-classic-ii-stethoscope-adult-navy-blue-2147-12-214-240-lrAbortion has a very low risk of complication. According to the United Kingdom’s National Health Service (NHS), excessive bleeding occurs in about 0.1 per cent of abortions, with similarly low figures for cervical damage (no more than 1 per cent) or damage to the womb (up to 0.4 per cent of surgical abortions and less than 0.1 per cent of medical abortions at 12-24 weeks).

The other main risk, infection, is typically treated effectively with a simple course of antibiotics.

The NHS also confirms that abortions do not affect the chances of successfully carrying to term future planned pregnancies.

Given these assurances by medical experts, the broad numerical correlations found in the Danish population study cited by Mr Leong are unlikely to indicate any causal link between abortion and the mortality outcomes he quoted.

The study itself does not establish any plausible medical reason for such a link.

Indeed, it is strange that Mr Leong suggests that Irish abortion law reduces maternal mortality.

In the recent high-profile case of Ms Savita Halappanavar, a miscarrying woman died of septicaemia and organ failure in an Irish hospital after hours of agony.

She was denied the abortion she repeatedly requested and which could have saved her life.

The Irish Health Service Executive found that the hospital’s interpretation of abortion law was “a material contributory factor” to the failures in her care.

As a mother who has undergone labour ending in an emergency caesarean section, I am bemused by arguments downplaying the physical and psychological impact of pregnancy, childbirth and the post-partum period.

It is common knowledge that even the most straightforward pregnancies task the body and mind substantially.

Furthermore, significant risks include gestational diabetes, high blood pressure, pre-eclampsia, deep vein thrombosis, pelvic prolapse and yeast infection.

Complications at childbirth can require emergency surgery, as I found first-hand. Post-natal depression can result in long-term impairment or even death.

Carrying a pregnancy to term is no small matter even when it is wholly planned and desired. It is pregnant women who face these risks and who should have the final say over the process.

This letter was first published in the Straits Times Forum on 9 December 2013.

Married women also at risk of HIV/AIDS

Most discussions of HIV/AIDS in Singapore focus on men, as new infections affect mostly them.

HIV picHowever, a qualitative study, commissioned by the Association of Women for Action and Research, of women with HIV or living with HIV-positive husbands or partners shows that married women are at risk from their infected husbands.

This five-year study was led by a team from the Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, and supported by the Department of STI (Sexually Transmitted Infections) Control, National Skin Centre and the Communicable Disease Centre.

Through in-depth interviews with 60 women, the study shows that among respondents who were married and diagnosed with HIV/AIDS, more than half reported that their husbands had infected them.

When these women learnt of their diagnosis, they experienced denial, shock, anger, shame and sadness.

Many of these married women had been put at risk by a lack of sexual empowerment in marriage. Several were unaware of having any right to refuse sex or demand condom use. Those who had wanted to protect themselves, however, could not persuade their HIV-infected husbands to practise safer sex. Some husbands even became violent when asked to use condoms.

Many of the women surveyed lacked knowledge about the symptoms, transmission and prevention of STIs, about condom use or ways of successfully persuading partners to use condoms. Over 60 per cent had little or no knowledge of HIV/AIDS; many had the misconception that HIV affects only gay men, drug abusers and sex workers.

Patients’ difficulties were compounded by unsympathetic family, friends and community. Most women disclosed their condition only partially to those around them, holding themselves back from being helped by support groups or counsellors to cope emotionally, engage in self-care and improve social functioning.

Some women in the study could not hold on to full-time work, due to the stigma associated with HIV and their attempts to hide their condition.

Loss of employment made it harder for HIV-diagnosed women to access the costly healthcare required. More affordable medication and healthcare are needed.

The study highlighted helpful measures, such as empowering patients with more knowledge about the good prognosis of HIV/AIDS with treatment, as well as about coping strategies and self-care methods. Support from family, friends and other infected women further enables proactive responses.

Education about sexual health and empowerment must enable women to protect themselves from infection. The public should also be educated not to stigmatise and marginalise people infected with HIV/AIDS.

Our study shows that a lack of sexual rights has direct impact on women’s health. Should our society continue to provide legal immunity for marital rape, indicating that women cannot refuse sex with their husbands, even at the risk of infection?

World Aids Day (Dec 1) is dedicated to raising awareness about HIV/AIDS. We must raise such awareness to attain good sexual health as the right of all in society.

Wong Mee Lian is an associate professor at the Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore; Vivienne Wee is the Research and Advocacy Director at the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE); Shibani Pandya is an AWARE member.

This letter was originally published in TODAY on 7 December 2013.

Roundtable: The International SlutWalk Movement

On 19 December, learn about SlutWalk movements around the world with Dr Andrea O’Reilly, a professor travelling around Asia to research her soon-to-be-published book on the International SlutWalk Movement.

slutwalkSlutWalk started in Toronto, Canada in 2011 as a response to a police officer’s comment that “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order to not be victimised.”

The statement sparked a strong movement against slut-shaming and victim-blaming, protesting a culture that blames victims for rape and assault, and spreading globally with the creation of SlutWalk groups around the world.

SlutWalk Singapore started in December 2011 with workshops and discussions around consent, sexuality and social attitudes, leading up to a gathering in Hong Lim Park.

On 19 December, Dr. O’Reilly will discuss her participation in the first-ever SlutWalk in Toronto, and the findings from her book on the international SlutWalk movement.

Event details:
Date: 19 December, Thursday
Time: 7:00pm – 9:00pm
Venue: AWARE Centre
Click here to register!

Speaker’s Bio:

Andrea O’Reilly, PhD, is Professor in the School of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at York University, Toronto. She is founder and director of the Motherhood Initiative for Research and Community Involvement, founder and editor-in-chief of the Journal of the Motherhood Initiative and founder and editor of the Demeter Press, the first feminist press on motherhood. Dr. O’Reilly is currently editing a book on the international slutwalk movement.

Understand Little India events without racism

In the aftermath of recent events in Little India, racist and xenophobic comments are steadily surfacing online and offline, conflating the actions of a few with the culture, habits and tendencies of migrant workers from South Asia in general.

5795201144_a3e04428e9These migrant workers are experiencing a prejudiced characterisation of “their” “culture” as violent, unthinking and dangerous, and are being blamed for damaging or deviating from “the Singapore way”. We hear alarming calls to send foreign workers “back where they came from” or ban them from coming out of their dorms. One of AWARE’s staff members was informed by a cab driver that “you Indians” can display such behaviour in “your country”, but not in Singapore.

Not only are such xenophobic comments inaccurate and discriminatory, but they also create a hostile and exclusionary environment in which people (both migrants and citizens) of a certain skin colour might feel unsafe and unwanted. Migrants often have limited recourse against racist attacks and slurs. Far from providing solutions, such comments can increase a sense of division and alienation, sowing the seeds for further conflict. The actions of those who “rioted” in Little India need to be examined and understood without attaching blame to others of the same ethnicity or nationality.

It is heartening to see people take on these xenophobic comments. We need more people stepping up to call out those making ignorant, racist remarks, and to reject alarmist calls for greater segregation between local and migrant communities. Our nation is made of migrants and citizens of many different backgrounds and ethnicities, all of whom must be recognised as having a stake in Singapore’s culture, economy and society.

We hope that any examination of Sunday’s events will be informed by a thorough understanding of the marginalisation and discrimination experienced by migrant workers in Singapore.

‘Would you step in?’: the We Can! video

we can logoWhat would you do if you saw a man abusing his girlfriend in the middle of Orchard Road?  The We Can! campaign poses this question with a new video, Would you step in?, which has attracted more than 41,000 views on YouTube in just two days.

This video shows how we can all step in to help strangers in need and to end violence against women – a message that urgently needs to be heard. The Charities Aid Foundation, which measures the willingness of people to help strangers across 135 countries and economies, ranked Singapore in second last place in its latest index.

The video depicts violence in a public place, but it also points out that most violence against women happens at home. Visit the We Can! Facebook app, Blk 2511, to go behind the doors of a seemingly peaceful HDB block and uncover everyday stories of abuse.

Intervention is as important here as it is out on the street.  Many survivors of domestic violence cite a lack of support from family and friends as a major reason they were forced to remain in an abusive situation.  They may be told that it is their responsibility to placate their abusers, or that they should endure abuse for the sake of their children.  Leaving violent relationships can have consequences for matters such as finances and housing, which can only be addressed with support from others.

We Can! asks every one of us to provide that support.  On an individual level, we can offer a listening ear or a safe place to stay.  We can also intervene to let abusers know that their abusive conduct is unacceptable and correct the misconceptions that they use to justify it.  We can participate in changing the social structures and attitudes that enable, legitimise and perpetuate violence.  People who wish to find out more about the changes they can make are invited to participate in a We Can! workshop where these questions are explored in greater detail.

 

Frequently asked questions about ‘Would you step in?’

1.  Why focus on violence against women specifically?

Violence of any kind is deplorable, regardless of the gender of the victim.  Blk 2511 showcases a range of stories of violence, and both male victims and female abusers are among the characters featured.

However, the gendered attitudes that enable and excuse violence against women have many specific features that differ from societal attitudes towards other forms of violence, so it is helpful to address them separately.  Moreover, recent statistics released by PAVE indicate that spousal abuse is the most common form of family violence and most victims of spousal abuse are women.  This is consistent with global patterns in intimate partner abuse (see for example the findings of the World Health Organisation).

2.  Does the video trivialise violence against women?

The scenario acted out in the video, like the stories in Blk 2511, has been created based on the accounts of real people who have encountered violence.  One of the messages of We Can! is that violence isn’t always black and blue – it can take many forms and verbal abuse is often part of a broader pattern of abuse involving other kinds of violence too.

Men and associate membership

We are frequently asked why ordinary membership of AWARE is only open to women, with male members becoming associate members with fewer participation rights. Button showing a question mark

AWARE believes in human rights for all and focuses specifically on addressing the gendered barriers in Singapore that currently prevent this from being a reality. Women are systematically disadvantaged in Singapore and the world because of the prevalence of patriarchal and sexist ideologies which accord greater status and power to men. In our political system, in various corporate decision-making bodies and almost every other centre of social, political and economic power, men tend to have a greater voice. The views and experiences of women and girls are frequently overlooked as the default human being is assumed to be male.

In addressing gendered barriers to equal human rights for all, AWARE believes that it is important to provide a forum for participation and decision-making which specifically seeks out and foregrounds the experiences and concerns of women and girls, who are the people who are predominantly marginalised in the status quo.

At the same time, prevailing ideas of gender also hurt men and boys. The dominant system certainly does not advantage all men in every single area of life and society. Men and boys who do not conform to narrow-minded views about appropriate masculinity face a particular burden. Unequal National Service obligations are the product of the sexist view that men are “strong” while women are “weak” and should be primarily homemakers. Men also have a large stake in dismantling gendered barriers in society.

There are men who share AWARE’s ethos and volunteer with us in many areas. We greatly value their contributions and perspectives. The appropriate participation rights to accord male members are a recurring topic of discussion at AWARE and members may well decide at a future stage that the present approach requires review.

No shame in sex talk but sexual violence is no joke

By Jolene Tan, Programmes and Communications Senior Manager, AWARE

NS-uniform

Mr Chong Zi Liang suggests that a prudish drive to stamp out “lewd lyrics”, “swearing” and “dirty talk” in the military would be misplaced (“Aware missed an opportunity to engage”; last Sunday).

He might be surprised to hear that the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) agrees with him. Our concerns have never been based on squeamishness about “girlfriends, underwear, sex” or other purportedly impolite topics.

We are a strong proponent of frank and honest discussions about sexuality and human bodies; shame should not attach to these subjects.

However, we must distinguish between open (even vulgar but not sexist) conversation about sex, and the hostile and intimidating celebration of sexual violence against women.

A society where statements of intent to rape are seen as normal and amusing has profound consequences for women’s welfare and gender equality.

First, this communicates to rape victims that their experiences are merely a laughing matter. This worsens their trauma and the problem of under-reporting (“Sexual crimes remain under radar in S’pore”; last Monday).

Second, such jibes are frequently targeted at women, sending the message that they are not welcome to participate on an equal footing in social, professional and public spaces.

A society that tolerates widespread jokes about committing violence against particular ethnic or religious groups cannot claim to be truly inclusive. The same is true of gender-based violence.

Genuine openness cannot come about in social spaces saturated with bullying and discriminatory speech.

Our observations about the song Purple Light must be understood in the wider context of unwelcoming workplace environments.

We did not write to the Defence Ministry and Singapore Armed Forces about only one song. Rather, we highlighted practices and attitudes that exclude and marginalise both female soldiers and men who do not conform to narrow ideas of masculinity.

These have no place in a public institution intended for the defence of all. Singing about rape is only one piece of this puzzle.

It can be difficult for sensible people to appreciate how serious the normalisation of sexual violence has become.

At a recent forum theatre production, our student audience, far from recoiling from a scene of rape, cheered on the fictitious rapist. And opposition figure Nicole Seah revealed that rape threats are part of the landscape facing a young female politician (“Nicole Seah reveals struggles since being in political spotlight”; last Monday).

The discussion sparked by the move against Purple Light has been sorely needed.

This letter was first published in the Sunday Times on 1 December 2013.

Abortion laws should protect patients’ rights and welfare

By Jolene Tan, Programmes and Communications Senior Manager, AWARE

WE STRONGLY disagree with recent calls to reduce access to abortion services (“Tweak abortion laws to match medical advances” by Ms Joanna Chen and “Restore need for parental consent for girls under 18” by Mr Darius Lee; both published on Monday).

stethoscopeAbortion is a medical service. Laws and procedures relating to access to it should seek only to protect the rights and welfare of patients. They should not interfere with their health and bodies in the name of abstract agendas like “reducing promiscuity”.

Expert medical consensus does not support reducing the time limit for abortions from 24 weeks.

When the British Parliament recently discussed a similar proposal, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the British Medical Association rejected the idea, on the grounds that there was no medical or scientific justification for cutting the limit.

Currently, the 24-week limit provides women with time to find out about their unwanted pregnancies, seek support and make decisions. It must remain if we are to present patients with the full range of options for making a decision about their own bodies and their families’ needs.

Pre-abortion counselling should be available on a basis that prioritises patients’ health and empowers them to make informed choices based on their needs, circumstances and aspirations. It should not simply be a roadblock pushing everyone away from abortion.

Finally, parental consent should not be required. Aged-based regulations on cigarettes, alcohol, marriage and contracts exist to protect minors, not to impede their access to health care.

Mr Lee suggests this regulation may reduce suicide risks. But the main study making this claim is an abstract econometric analysis of statistical relationships with no psychiatric or medical content.

Minors may be at risk of family violence if made to disclose unwanted pregnancies to their parents.

Mr Lee suggests that minors with abusive parents can apply to the courts to bypass the requirement. But the legal system is a time-consuming and intimidating hurdle for a minor who is already facing distressing circumstances. It may also cause them to miss the 24-week time limit.

Ultimately, the consequences of unwanted pregnancies are most profoundly felt by the pregnant individuals themselves. Rather than placing obstacles in their path, regulations should ensure safe and timely access to a full range of medical services to help them make informed choices.

This letter was first published in the Straits Times Forum on 23 November 2013.