Author: Site Administration

Dialogue & dinner with women’s rights expert Laurel Weldon

 

Professor Laurel Weldon is an expert on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality.

On Wednesday, 12 September she will join us for a dialogue on issues ranging from violence against women to the politics of intersectionality.

Details
Date: Wednesday, 12 September 2012
Time: 7.00pm – 9.00pm (Dinner will be provided)
Venue: AWARE Centre (Block 5 Dover Crescent #01-22)

About the speaker

S. Laurel Weldon is Associate Professor of Political Science at Purdue University. She is the author of When Protest Makes Policy: How Social Movements Represent Disadvantaged Groups (University of Michigan Press 2010 forthcoming) and Protest, Policy and the Problem of Violence Against Women: A Cross-National Comparison (University of Pittsburgh 2002), as well as articles in the Journal of Politics, Political Research Quarterly, Perspectives on Politics, Politics & Gender, and the International Journal of Feminist Politics.

She is also co-editor of the forthcoming Oxford Handbook on Politics and Gender (with Georgina Waylen, Karen Celis, and Johanna Kantola – under contract with Oxford University Press). With Mala Htun of the New School, she is currently involved in a project on States and Sex Equality: Why do Governments Promote Women’s Rights?, which is funded by the National Science Foundation. She serves on the council of the American Political Science Association (APSA) and is currently the President of the Women and Politics Research Section of APSA.

This dialogue session will include discussion of the following issues:

  • A global analysis of women’s rights (including violence against women, family law, reproductive rights, parental leave, employment law), childcare, women’s representation (in government, civil society etc): An overview of how women’s rights vary in these areas over time (1975-2005), across countries, and why.
  • Government action on violence against women: How do different governments respond to this problem; current successes and policy challenges
  • The politics of intersectionality: How to analyze, and organize around, differences among women and men

This event is free, and open to AWARE members and volunteers. Please register here.

Cast your Alamak! vote now

Alamak! Who will it be this year?

The Alamak! Award ‘honours’ the most sexist behaviour over the past year. The nominees were selected by members of the public, and the ‘winner’ will be decided through Internet voting.

Voting closes on Sept 8, and the ‘winner’ will be announced at our fundraising event, the Supersonic Big Ball, on Sept 10.

Ready? Meet this year’s nominees:

LONDON WEIGHT MANAGEMENT 

For conceptualizing, producing and running a TV ad that was dangerously misleading about serious issues like post-partum depression and suicide, and which carried damaging messages about health, body image and self-esteem.

In this ad, London Weight Management presents a story where a woman’s weight caused her child’s anguish, her husband’s hatred, her termination at work and extreme self-loathing that erupts into outbreaks of screaming.

All is remedied by London Weight Management treatments – it is only by being thin that that she can be happy and gain her husband’s love.

View the ad here and find out more here.

MR TAN JEE SAY AND DR TAN CHENG BOCK

While running for President, both managed to find words to annoy half the electorate.

“I would like to go back to the days when women can afford to be housewives,” Mr Tan Jee Say said, when asked about his views on the Baby Bonus.

When asked how to encourage female participation in politics, Dr Tan Cheng Bock replied: “The political arena is a difficult area for women in Singapore because the commitment is really very heavy. So you got to get the permission of your husband.”

Find out more here.

DATE WITH DAD

 

It is laudable that this campaign by Focus On The Family Singapore believes that fathers are crucial to helping their daughters build self-worth.

But it is problematic when it encourages dads to “affirm” their daughters’ “femininity” – surely each daughter has her own unique traits worth affirming besides the fact that she is female?

Also unsettling – the event encourages fathers to give their daughters a purity ring, available for sale on their website, to “signify your commitment to protecting her purity until her wedding day”.

Find out more here.

BRIDE OF THE WORLD

Contestants for this pageant, which is co-organised by the People’s Association, model white bridal gowns, because “white is the universal colour of purity” and “where East meets West, a woman wears a resplendent white gown to proclaim her worthiness as a bride”.

The pageant represents marriage as a form of national service.

“In Singapore, our women play an integral role in contributing to our society’s well-being at home, at work and in various communities. They help establish and maintain wholesome family values, and together with our National Service men, they provide our nation’s Total Defence.”

Find out more here.

SHAPE RUN 2012

This women’s run introduced male pacers for the first time. Why no female pacers? According to Shape’s press release and media reports, the male pacers were meant to be “eye candy” – they must “ooze oodles of charm”, in order that the women have “a chance…to chase guys for a change”. Heaven forbid the female runners are there to, you know, run, and not pant after eye candy.

Find out more here.

 

Voting is closed.

[poll id=”5″]

 

Popular parody group Chestnuts will be spoofing the nominees at the Supersonic Big Ball.  Don’t miss their hilarious take on this year’s nominees – reserve your seats today!

Roundtable Discussion: Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity


Why is there a fuss about sexual orientation? How is it related to gender identity?

Should feminists automatically be LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) supporters?

Starting from the current Roundtable theme of sexual autonomy, let’s explore how sexual orientation and gender identity are connected to personal wellbeing and human rights, making them integral to any individual or organisation’s work to advance human welfare and dignity, against prejudice and injustice.

Join us for a no-holds-barred discussion or simply, an introduction.

About the speakers:
Jean and Kelly are members of Sayoni and People Like Us.

Sayoni is a community that works to empower queer women and People Like Us is the pioneer gay and lesbian advocacy group in Singapore.

Register here

Planning the road ahead for gender equality

Dear AWARE members and supporters,

It has been a few weeks since the new Board was elected, and we have all been very busy planning the road ahead for AWARE.

For those of you who could not make it to the AGM, I look forward to meeting you soon at one of the many exciting events we have coming up, like our fundraising dinner, the Supersonic Big Ball, on Sept 10.

In the meantime, let me introduce myself.

I have always believed that we can each help to shape a world that is fully grounded in gender equality. This belief first brought me to AWARE 11 years ago, and inspired me to serve on the Executive Committee between 2004 and 2007.

Work commitments took me away for a while, but when I set up my own HR consulting practice this year, I decided to return to AWARE to serve as President.

What I have missed the most – and this is why I am so excited about coming back – is the richness of the discourse here, and the shared commitment to making a difference.

I step in the shoes of many AWARE Presidents before me, who worked tirelessly to ensure that women’s voices were heard clearly, by the people who matter.

During my term, I want to build on this legacy by addressing the following challenges:

  • Eliminating Gender Discrimination
  • Building An Inclusive Economy & Caring Society
  • Nurturing Women Leaders Of Tomorrow

We accomplished a lot in 2011, as you can see from our Annual Report. None of these achievements would have been possible without the hard work, dedication and expertise of our members, volunteers, and supporters. Your passion has always been the secret to AWARE’s success.

Thank you for all your contributions, and I very much hope that AWARE can count on your continued support as we take on more exciting new challenges.

 

Sincerely,
Winifred Loh

President
AWARE 

Find out more about Winifred here.

 

 

 

Jane’s story: Sex, lies & video calls

After falling prey to an Internet romance scam, Jane* approached AWARE for counselling and legal help. She has decided to share her story here in the hope that it will prevent others from becoming victims.

This is a true story.

She was Jane Wee. He was Danny Stewart.

He found her through Facebook.

She was lonely and disillusioned by love. He was persistent.

She ignored the stranger’s first few emails then figured, what the heck. It would be OK to have a penpal. “I had a penpal as a kid – it was fun.”

But with each passing email, chat session and, eventually, phone call, Danny ramped up the affection – and the pressure.

He was skilled at toying with Jane’s feelings: When she pulled back, he pressed on. When she showed interest, he would disappear for days. It drove her crazy. Her desire grew.

He said he was Irish, though his broken English suggested otherwise.

“As more we know each other in these relationship the more our love growes.”

Most of his writing was like that: flawed, vacuous, but loving. Yet at times his prose not only improved but waxed poetic.

“When deep down in the core of your being you believe that your soulmate exists, there is no limit to the ways he or she can enter your life.”

As time passed she revealed more and more personal details: Her phone number, her address, where she worked.

In turn he also shared bits about himself.

Age: 42
Favorite movie: Romeo & Juliet, Titanic
Favorite TV show: Sex And The City, Desperate Housewive
Favorite clothes: Pyjamas and sneakers
What I love to buy: music, clothes and jewellery

A man who likes Sex and the City and buying jewellery? Despite an odd penchant for pyjamas, he was a girl’s dream come true.

On top of that he had a high-level job as a field engineer in the oil & gas industry – a job that involved him travelling around the world and being frequently offshore.

After many demands that he send photos, eventually he produced two: he was not ugly but not gorgeous. His beard, glasses and shaved head gave him a ‘kinda cool kinda dorky’ look that you could feel safe with. So far, so good.

Because he moved around he had several phone numbers. Yet he was constantly unreachable.

When their schedules allowed it, they chatted over Live Messenger Video. The camera on his highly unreliable laptop was always broken. So on the calls, he could see her but she could not see him.

As the relationship escalated, communication became more steamy. She was a cybersex noob. He was frustrated by their distance. She tried to please him. She tried to turn him on. She exposed herself. He always wanted more.

It is a joy to feel sexy and wanted. But at times this crossed a line for her and she left their cyber lovemaking sessions feeling torn and ashamed. She wanted to show her love, but was shy and conservative at heart.

Eventually, after months of cat-and-mouse attempts to meet up in this country and that, he confirmed he had booked his flight to Singapore. He also booked a room at the Royal Plaza on Scotts and sent her the confirmation. After six months of long-distance romance, the lovers would finally be united.

When the longed-for day finally arrived, she went to meet him at Changi Airport. His flight was due in at 4:30pm.

At 4:35pm as she peered through the glass window of the arrival hall, her phone rang.

It was a woman with a Malaysian accent.

“Is Danny Stewart your boyfriend?”

“Yes”

“We are holding him in custody. He has broken immigration law by entering the country with too much cash. He was carrying $32,000. Unless he pays the fine we will detain him. You may speak to him for two minutes.”

The phone was then passed to what sounded like a very frightened Danny.

“I didn’t know there was a regulation. Please! You have to get me out of here.”

The woman came back on the phone and explained that to effect Danny’s release, Jane would need to pay $2,500. She gave her instructions on how to wire the money from the Changi Airport branch of Western Union to a branch in Malaysia.

Jane agreed. Danny could pay her back when he got out. She feared for his safety.

She knew, of course, that the “fine” was bogus. Danny had fallen victim to a bribery scam.

At the Western Union counter, Jane filled in the form.

Before accepting her instructions, the manager politely asked, “Ma’am, do you know the person you are sending the money to?”

She hesitated.

“Ma’am please. There are a lot of scams out there. Do you know this person?”

After a pause, she briefly explained why she needed to send the money.

“Ma’am, it’s a scam. I’m afraid that we cannot let you make the payment.”

“But I’m worried for my friend. If I lose the money I can live with it. I just want to protect him.”

“There’s someone you need to talk to.”

With this puzzling statement the manager dialed the phone and passed it to her. A woman was on the other end of the line.

“Hi. I’m a senior manager at Western Union and I’d like to tell you a story. Let me know if it sounds familiar.”

The story relayed was Jane’s very own story: The meeting on Facebook; the months of online romance; the plans to finally meet; waiting at the airport; the phonecall; the story about bringing in too much money and some fine; the request to wire money to Malaysia.

Jane was stunned. But nothing struck her harder than the final punchline.

You have to understand Miss: Danny is in on it. He has been playing you all along.

It took a while to sink in. It couldn’t be true.

She left the Western Union counter with the final advice to contact the police. Stunned, she sat down amongst the bustle of waiting families and happy reunions to compose herself.

Soon, the Malaysian lady called back demanding to know where the money was.

“Western Union won’t let me make the transfer. So what am I supposed to do? Leave me alone.”

The stranger got more angry and passed the phone on to ‘her manager’ who gave Jane new instructions for wiring money. She told them to get lost.

After hanging up, the calls started coming from Danny. He was crying. He was afraid, desperate. “Please, please pay.”

His voice still tugged at her heart. But she found the strength to resist. “Don’t call me again.”

The calls stopped but SMSes still poured in. Then finally, hours later, the SMSes stopped too.

The next day she reported the matter to the police. From their perspective the jurisdiction of the crime was not likely Singapore. It was wherever those asking for the money resided, which seemed to be Malaysia. It was a dead end.

In the days that followed, life went back to normal. Dull normal. Sad normal. After the heady romance and cruel let down, normal was painful. She had trusted someone who had her heart ripped out.

She poured back over his emails with fresh eyes.

The lovely line about finding your soulmate was stolen from author and love guru Arielle Ford.

His job description? Taken right out of a job listing of an oil exploration company.

Worst of all? His lengthy list of personal factoids could be found word-for-word posted on the website romancescam.com. It had been published over three years ago. It seems Danny also goes by the name of John Allen, Adam Raines, Mike Ferris and Jose Cruz. He’d been scamming people all over the world.

Was there nothing real about him? Danny Stewart was a complete fiction.

Jane was spiraling into depression. Yet she clung to the hope that time would heal her wounds. Would the day come when this was a distant memory, when she could forgive herself for falling for someone she never met, who didn’t even really exist?

It is one thing to have your heart broken. But to be made a fool…that is quite different. The broken-hearted receive sympathy. The foolish are told to wise up. Nobody remembers they also have hearts to mend.

As it turned out, Jane was not given a chance to move on. The end did not come so easily.

Two weeks after the airport drama, a large brown envelope arrived by mail. It had a CD containing the video from their online intimacy. She was naked. Exposed.

The envelope included a simple message: Call.

The person she knew as Danny no longer contacted her. She now found herself being harassed on a daily basis by emails and calls from a group of people – a gang – based in Malaysia.

They never made any outright threats. Their request was simple: Spare your family the shame of your behaviour. Call.

She didn’t.

They fed back all the info she had provided to Danny over the months of courtship: names of relatives, addresses, email addresses, phone numbers. The threat was implicit: Call and do what we want or everyone gets the video.

She went back to the Police. They recommended she speak to the Malaysian authorities.

Eventually, through a friend, she found someone who was familiar with these scams.

“Almost certainly it is a Nigerian gang operating out of KL. But it will be almost impossible to track them down unless they break the law.”

Nobody seemed able to help. They never demanded money. The threats were always veiled.

“Don’t ignore my email. Things will only get worse. You need my help.”

The phone number they gave came up on a number of fraud watchdog sites. This gang was very active – they were 24-7 scam artists. Was there nothing that could stop them?

Eventually she decided she had to let her family know. Better for them to hear the story from her own lips than suffer the shock of one day receiving the video by surprise.

Her mother was unwell. She would have to tell her father. But how do you tell your father that his daughter has revealed herself on video?

“It was possibly the hardest thing I’ve ever had to do in my life.”

When she finally worked up the courage, she told him her story. Through tears, she confessed her shame and foolishness.

“But you know what he said? ‘We all do silly things sometimes. Don’t worry about it. I am more concerned for your safety.’”

Just like that.

Just like that her father’s love made what was the worst episode in her life become something that she just might get through. People can surprise you.

Epilogue

It has been two months since Jane learned the truth about Danny. The emails keep coming, but they are now less frequent.

Jane is receiving counselling and still expects that one day all her friends and colleagues will all see the video. She has not yet reconciled herself to this possibility and fears the shame will be overwhelming.

But who knows? People can surprise you. And each day, Jane is getting stronger. Maybe one day she will laugh it off and say, “Yup. We all do silly things sometimes.”

In the meantime, Danny Stewart is still out there. Or John Allen. Or whatever he is calling himself these days.

Warning signs you’re being scammed online

  • Poor spelling and grammar
  • Failure to send pictures on request, or video chat
  • Having an accent that does not sound like it belongs to the country he claims to be from
  • Forming an online relationship that becomes serious quickly
  • Claims to be working abroad
  • Insisting money be sent via Western Union or other money order

Note: Both men AND women have fallen prey to such scams.

The scam may include requests for:

  • Airfare and visa
  • Travelling money
  • Payment for medical bills and other emergencies
  • Payment for fines and deposits

What should you do?

  • Insist he reveal his face via a video call
  • Show your correspondence to a friend and get their opinion. Does the language and grammar used sound authentic to their claimed nationality?
  • Google their more eloquent and impressive statements: Are they stolen from the Internet?
  • NEVER SEND MONEY

*All names have been changed.

The writer is AWARE’s volunteer IT consultant.

Roundtable Discussion: Sexual Harassment At The Workplace

Our Roundtable Discussions over the next few months will be part of a series under the theme Sexual Autonomy, Free Of Coercion.

Women’s right to sexual autonomy is imposed upon by many coercive forces, including laws, policies, religious prescriptions, cultural values, family structures, social pressures.

What do we mean by ‘sexual autonomy, free of coercion’? It means not to be forced to have sex with people that we do not want. It means the right to consent or not to consent. It also means the right to choose who we want to have sexual relations with (or even not at all).

In our Roundtable Discussions, we will explore the coercive forces that are imposed on women, including those in the family, workplace and other social contexts. Such coercion impacts negatively on women’s physical and psychological health and well-being, with ripple effects on the rest of society.

We kick off this series with our Roundtable  Discussion on June 21, which focuses on workplace sexual harassment.

Workplace Sexual Harassment is common in Singapore. In its 2008 Workplace Sexual Harassment Survey, 54% of the 500 respondents reported that they experienced some form of sexual harassment.

Yet, Singapore’s laws and mechanism in this area are woefully inadequate. In 2007 and 2011, the UN CEDAW Committee repeated its call to Singapore to comply with its obligation to enact legislation on sexual harassment in the workplace and in educational institutions. Nothing has yet been done.

To assist the State to fulfill its CEDAW obligations, AWARE’s Workplace Sexual Harassment Committee has prepared a further report showing why:

a) based on cases reported to AWARE’s Support Services, the current laws and mechanisms are simply inadequate

b) it is in the interest of Singapore to provide better protection in this area

The Committee strongly urges the State to expand the proposed Cyber Harassment Act to a comprehensive Harassment Act to deal with all forms of harassment, including Workplace Sexual Harassment. This would be appropriate, expedient and innovative.

The Committee, led by Corinna Lim, will present and discuss, its findings and its proposals for legal reform. Please do attend to find out more and to share your views on the proposed solutions.

EVENT DETAILS

Date: Thursday 21 June 2012
Time: 7:30pm
Venue: AWARE Centre

Sign up for this event here.

Joint civil society statement regarding National Plan of Action against Trafficking in Persons

We welcome the publication by the Inter?agency Taskforce on Trafficking in Persons (the Taskforce) of the National Plan of Action against Trafficking in Persons 2012?2015 (the NPA). We see this as an encouraging indication of the government’s commitment to combat human trafficking in Singapore. It is also a positive first step towards establishing a system which endeavours to prevent human trafficking in Singapore, guarantees comprehensive protection of trafficked and potentially trafficked persons and prosecutes those responsible.

We are also pleased that civil society was consulted as part of the development of the NPA and we welcome the envisaged on?going partnership between the Taskforce and civil society. As civil society members, we are also keen to facilitate this process and met recently to discuss how we can contribute to the work ahead.

We are of the view that accession to the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (the Palermo Protocol) should be a priority for the Taskforce. We urge the Taskforce to fast?track the enactment into Singapore law of the definition of trafficking set out in Article 3 of the Palermo Protocol, given the importance of having an agreed starting point for all efforts to combat trafficking in Singapore. We also ask the Taskforce to identify the ways in which this definition is currently being operationalised by government agencies when dealing with cases of trafficked and potentially trafficked persons.

We ask for a range of interim measures to be put in place and that the taskforce work collaboratively with civil society organisations on this issue. This is important as the enactment of a dedicated anti?trafficking law, which establishes a comprehensive system of prevention, prosecution and protection, may not be in place for some time. Civil society organisations have an important role to play in developing, implementing and monitoring interim measures through which trafficked and potentially trafficked persons can access the services and support.

We ask for international standards and best practices to be utilised in the implementation of the NPA. In its most recent concluding observations on Singapore (2011), the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women recommended both the ratification of the Palermo Protocol and the enactment of specialized legislation against trafficking in persons, as well as the ratification of other instruments relevant to human trafficking, such as the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families and ILO Conventions No. 111 and No. 189. The Taskforce is urged to take these recommendations into consideration when implementing the NPA.

We state that there is a broad range of expertise and skills amongst the civil society organisations here which we hope the Taskforce will utilise fully when implementing the NPA, particularly in relation to:
i) Research into a) the nature and scale of human trafficking in Singapore, b) the effectiveness of existing measures and c) the relevant international standards and best practices from other jurisdictions, all of which should inform the work of the Taskforce and its partners.
ii) Training all relevant stakeholders, within government and civil society, based on the experience of civil society organisations, which have long?standing experience of working with trafficked and potentially trafficked persons.
iii) Co?ordinating targeted awareness­raising campaigns, informed by research, amongst the government, the trafficked and potentially trafficked persons, the media and the Singapore public at large.
iv) The provision of direct services to trafficked and potentially trafficked persons, the co? ordination of outreach programmes amongst service?users, the referral of trafficking cases to the Taskforce and active engagement in the subsequent victim?centred processes of prosecution and protection.

As civil society organisations, we are committed to the process and will meet regularly as a forum to co?ordinate our anti?trafficking?related work throughout the implementation period of the NPA. We therefore ask the Taskforce to consider formalising regular engagement with this forum of civil society organisations to develop and implement the details of the high?level strategy set out in the NPA in a transparent and collaborative manner.

Signatories:
1. Humanitarian Organization for Migration Economics (HOME) (co­organiser of meeting)
2. The Trafficking Research Project (TTRP) (co­organiser of meeting)
3. AWARE
4. EMANCIPASIA
5. Good Shepherd Sisters
6. Jacqueline Tan (Civil Society Activist)
7. MARUAH
8. ONE (SINGAPORE)
9. Project X
10. Singapore Committee For UN Women
11. Singapore Council of Women’s Organisations (SCWO)
12. Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2)
13. Vincent Law (Civil Society Activist)

What makes a good feminist?

It shouldn’t matter that there is no consensus on how a person should behave or the causes she should support as a feminist. The question that guides a feminist should be: Am I hurting or helping other women?

By Zheng Huifen

On March 4, 2012, hundreds of women (and a few men) packed the theatre of the Sydney Opera House to hear Naomi Wolf and Germaine Greer present on feminism. I was in the audience, having flown 8 hours from Singapore for this event in honour of International Women’s Day.

The day’s topic was The F-word: A Day Of Global Feminist Debate. Notwithstanding the promise of a ‘global’ view in the title, the speakers largely touched on “Western feminism”, i.e., the women’s liberation movement from an Anglo-American perspective, beginning from the 18th century.

American author and prominent feminist Naomi Wolf started the afternoon by wondering why many young women no longer felt comfortable identifying themselves with feminism. She also noted that many Anglo-American women expressed dissatisfaction with their lives, wondering “is this all there is?”, even as women around the world continue to break away from traditional gender roles while assuming positions of influence in society and the workplace.

Wolf then attempted to trace the so-called main sources of Anglo-American feminism: The 19th-century concept of women as the “angel in the house”; the existentialism of the mid-20th century; and the frantic consumerism of the late 20th century.

Wolf believed that this intellectual heritage has led to the adoption of a ‘victim’ posture in modern feminist writing, with debates focused on superficial lifestyle choices like working mothers vs stay-at-home mothers, or going barefaced vs using cosmetics.

There is also an underlying assumption that before a woman can be stand up to be an advocate, she must be first be seen as socially acceptable and able to represent the higher moral ground. This is a legacy, says Wolf, of the Victorian suffragettes, who placed women on a pedestal as the fairer, purer sex deserving of protection from ‘male viciousness’. Thus idealised, women were seen as the moral bulwark of society, the nurturer of children, and the the linchpin of their families.

Wolf ended her talk with the suggestion that the feminist movement reclaimed Mary Wollenstoncraft’s 1792 piece Vindication of the Rights of Women as the feminist manifesto, as Wollenstoncraft espoused Enlightenment principles of universal equality and rights.

The second speaker, Germaine Greer, is an Australian writer and academic known for her sharp wit and take-no-prisoners attitude. Greer’s talk certainly lived up to her reputation. She declared that gender equality is not worth pursuing, because women should not desire to ape men. Women should instead pursue solidarity with each other. She gave the example of labour unions, uniting to demand better treatment for workers.

The afternoon’s events closed with a panel discussion between Wolf, Greer, war correspondent Eliza Griswold and Clem Bastow, a freelance journalist and the organiser of Slutwalk Melbourne.

Griswold shared her experience as a war correspondent in Arab countries. She clearly disagreed with Wolf’s proposal for a ‘declaration of universal rights’ as the basis for feminism. Griswold stated that in Arab countries, people used the language of justice to counter perceive inequalities. The language of rights was viewed as an American imposition on local Arab culture.

Bastow offered half-hearted solidarity with Wolf, while Greer and the audience were unresponsive.

At the end of the programme, Greer suggested that anyone who was interested in advocating for women’s causes should “just do it”, instead of worrying about how feminism and feminists are perceived. Indeed, a woman in the audience stood up and offered to start a new activism group. Her suggestion elicited the most enthusiastic response of the day.

So what was this writer’s takeaway from the afternoon?

Truth be told, I came to Sydney feeling somewhat jaded about the feminist movement, and was hoping to find answers at the F-Word debate. While I actively volunteer with AWARE and proudly and publicly identify as a feminist, I have found little personal satisfaction in the philosophy. In my mind was the very question raised by Wolf: “Is this all there is?”

I had a vision of the ‘Ideal Feminist Woman’ as a high-powered superwoman juggling career, family, friends, love, and good works, while maintaining perfect composure and a happy disdain for and independence from gender norms. At the same time, I wondered why few female peers identified with the movement.

It appears that I was also guilty of the “holier than thou” attitude identified by Wolf. And that may explain why many women shy away from identifying with the movement.

On the other hand, this may also explain why some readily use the feminist movement to boost their own legitimacy – to tap into the higher moral ground which they believe to be part of the feminist legacy. For instance, Sarah Palin, the right-wing American politician, has described herself as a ‘conservative feminist’.

The conclusion to draw from these episodes is that a woman does not advance the feminist cause simply by being in a position of some authority, or because she has certain accomplishments, or by trying to be ‘perfect’.

The fundamental principle of the feminist movement is to advance gender equality and support full autonomy for girls and women. Agreeing on the underpinning philosophy is important, and good to know, but not crucial.

During the F-Word session, there was no warm embrace by any speaker of the other speaker’s ideas. Wolf complained of being isolated by the ‘sisterhood’ due to ideological differences; Greer spiritedly defended the practice of female genital mutilation (FGM) on the grounds of cultural and moral relativity.

It shouldn’t matter that there is not (and probably never was) a consensus on how a person should behave or the causes she should support as part of the Church of Feminism. The question that guides a feminist (aspiring, conflicted, or otherwise) should be: Am I hurting or helping other women?

I didn’t get the intellectual epiphany I was hoping to find in Sydney. But I did resolve to worry less about the academics of feminism and focus on practical application – supporting autonomy for girls and women, and empowering them achieve their full potential, whatever they choose to be.

The lived experience of men versus that of women will always be different, because of entrenched societal and gender norms and (yes, I’ll say it) biological differences. Even women in a modern society like Singapore continue to have unique issues that require advocacy and special representation before our lawmakers. Otherwise there would not be such great and continued demand for AWARE’s support services and advocacy efforts.

You do not have to be a ‘perfect angel’ of the ‘feminist church’ to help advance the cause. As Germaine Greer suggested: Just do it.

The writer is a lawyer and an AWARE volunteer since 2009.

Roundtable Discussion: Changing definitions of masculinity and femininity in Singapore

EVENT DETAILS

Organisers: AWARE and NUS – Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS)

Date:  May 12, 2012 , Saturday

Time: 2pm to 5pm

Venue:  National University of Singapore (Kent Ridge Campus), NUS FASS Faculty Lounge – Level 2 of The Deck (canteen) in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, around the corner from the Burger King on Level 2.

Moderator:       Dr. Vernie Oliveiro

Speakers:      Assoc. Prof. Eric C. Thompson, Assoc. Prof.  Michelle Lazar, Dr. Teo You Yenn

Please register for this event here.

THE DISCUSSION

A Crisis of Masculinity? Reflections on Singapore and the United States 
By Eric Thompson

Since the 1990s, various commentators have suggested that men face a “crisis of masculinity” in the wake of feminism and changing gender roles. In this roundtable, we will discuss the idea of a crisis of masculinity, whether it has any substance and what  if anything to do about it. The speaker, Associate Professor Eric C. Thompson of the Department of Sociology at the National University of Singapore will share reflections on the crisis of masculinity as it plays out in both Singapore and the United States.

About the speaker
Eric C. Thompson is Associate Professor and Chair of Graduate Studies in the Department of Sociology at the National University of Singapore. Before joining NUS, he completed a PhD in socio-cultural anthropology at the University of Washington and was a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Southeast Asian Studies, University of California Los Angeles. He teaches anthropology, gender studies, urban studies and research methods. He has conducted research for over two decades throughout Southeast Asia, primarily in Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Indonesia. His research interests include transnational networking, gender studies, urbanism, culture theory, and ASEAN regionalism. His work has appeared in the journals American Ethnologist,  Asian Studies Review, Contemporary Sociology, Contemporary Southeast Asia, Field Methods, Global Networks, Political Geography, and Urban Studies among others. He is author of Unsettling Absences: Urbanism in Rural Malaysia (NUS Press, 2007) and Attitudes and Awareness toward ASEAN: Findings of a Ten-Nation Survey (with Chulanee Thianthai, ISEAS Press, 2008).

What make for good men and good women?: Change and stasis in conceptions of masculinity and femininity in contemporary Singapore  
By Teo You Yenn

The past fifty years or so have seen radical changes in the ways people conceptualize what it is to be women and men. In contemporary Singapore, one would be hard put to find someone who claims that girls should not receive too much education, or that men ought not change diapers. At home, at the workplace, and in public life in general, women and men have both seen an expansion in the roles they may take on, and the identities they can embody as  women and men.

Yet, there are also persistent limits/constraints women and men face as they navigate their ways through various “choices” in life about work and family. This paper focuses on some of these constraints. I argue that narrow definitions about womanhood and manhood exist at the level of, and are perpetuated by, state policies. The state, through various policies around the familial, articulates specific, narrow and differential definitions of what it means to be a Singapore citizen for men and for women.

About the speaker

Teo You Yenn is Assistant Professor in the Division of Sociology at the Nanyang Technological University. She teaches in the areas of classical social theory; qualitative methodology in social research; social movements; political sociology, and the sociology of gender. Her work on state-society relations, gender politics, family policies, and the production of political culture has appeared in  Critical Asian Studies; Signs; Population, Space and Place; and Economy and Society. She edited a special issue in Economy and Society titled “Asian Families as Sites of State Politics” (August 2010, Vol. 39, Issue 3). Her book,  Neoliberal Morality in Singapore: How family policies make state and society, was published by Routledge in 2011. Her current research focuses on how welfare is conceptualized in Singapore. She also serves as a member of the Board at AWARE.

‘Power Femininity’ and Beauty Advertising  
By Michelle M. Lazar  

 In this presentation, I talk about the articulation of ‘power femininity’, an empowered and/or powerful feminine identity, in contemporary advertisements addressed to young ‘modern’ women in Singapore.  ‘Power femininity’ is part of a global postfeminist discourse, which incorporates feminist signifiers of emancipation and empowerment while at the same time promotes an assumption that feminist struggles are over and women today can ‘have it all’.

The site of analysis for this study is beauty advertising that deals with cosmetics, fragrances, skincare, hair and body management products and services, found in The Straits Times. Beauty advertising represents an interesting site for analysis, as the beauty industry has long been criticised by some (second wave) feminists as oppressive upon women for its promulgation of impossible beauty standards. Yet, some postfeminists have more recently reclaimed beauty practices as pleasurable and empowering for women. As a site of contestation, beauty advertising can be viewed as a productive space for the imbrication of post/feminist signifiers with patriarchal codes of femininity to produce a ‘power femininity’, without apparent contradiction.

In the talk I outline four ways that ‘power femininity’ is produced in beauty advertising, and critically discuss the implications this has for a female consumer identity today.

About the speaker
Michelle M. Lazar, Associate Professor in the Department of English Language and Literature at the National University of Singapore. She is the Academic Convenor for the Gender Studies Minor Programme as well as Assistant Dean for Research and the Chair of the Singapore Research Nexus in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. She is also concurrently on the Executive and Advisory Councils of the International Gender and Language Association. A critical discourse analyst by training, her research focuses on the analysis of power, ideology and identity in discourses about feminism, femininities, and masculinities in the Singapore media. She is a life member of AWARE.

About the moderator

Vernie Oliveiro is a member of AWARE and a Researcher at the Centre for Governance and Leadership at the Civil Service College. She was previously a  lecturer in the History Department at Harvard University, from which she received her Ph.D. in International History in 2010. Her current work focuses on governance, globalization and society in Singapore.