Ng Yi-Sheng

In my last article, I mentioned that two things had happened recently that made me shocked and angry at the Singapore government. The first was MDA’s imposition of a fine on Mediacorp for showing a wholesome gay family on TV, a case credibly reported by official news sources. The second is a rather more sordid affair, receiving only underground coverage thus far.

Last Friday, 25 April 2008, there was a police raid at a gay sauna named One Seven. Though none of the clients were arrested, the 74 year-old owner, Sam was injured by the supervising officer and arrested and jailed overnight for allegedly having assaulted the officer, a charge that he denies. No explanation was given for the raid – on being asked, the officers refused to produce a warrant and simply repeated over and over again that they were conducting a “spot check”.

This is the first time this has happened to a sauna here since 2001. I’d been led to believe that such raids were things of the past, like gay club raids or entrapment in cruising spots, back before the government reaffirmed that they wouldn’t prosecute anyone based on Section 377A. But now I’m scared that this recent raid represents a new backlash against gay institutions. The bad old days of police harassment might be back.

What the hell happened?

I’ve read several online accounts of the sauna raid on One Seven that happened on Friday, 25 April. A few conflicting details have come up, and I’m unsure of the accuracy and objectivity of reports, but here’s my potentially-flawed reconstruction of what happened that evening. (To refer to the sources I’ve used, please look here. Anyone with further details or clarification is welcome to post below.)

Around 8pm, a team of plain-clothes officers from the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), including two women officers, stopped at a gay sauna named Raw for a “spot check” of an undisclosed nature. They searched the premises and behaved discreetly; ultimately, nothing of note occurred. Later, they (or another similar team) turned up at another sauna, One Seven.

Around 10pm, the staff at One Seven discovered that their water supply had been turned off. When they opened the back door to check what was going on, the CID team demanded entry. When Sam tried to stop them and asked for a warrant, they refused and only repeated that they were doing a “spot check”. About four other police cars also turned up during the scuffle.

An alert was made to the patrons of the sauna: all the lights in the dim areas came on. (This is a standard signal of a police raid in gay entertainment spots.) However, when a woman police officer insisted on entering the space, Sam insisted it was a men’s club and forbade her entry, becoming agitated in the process. The supervising officer then threw him on the ground and twisted his arms behind his back to handcuff him. When he continued to shout, the officer instructed his men to take down the identities of patrons present and to make a video recording of the event.

By now, most patrons had gotten dressed and left the premises without interference. Some noticeably foreign patrons (a Japanese man and a Caucasian man) were questioned and were asked for their identification details. The actual video recording does not seem to have been used as a threat against patrons; the cameraman often seemed more interested in the floor than the people.

As far as we know, no clients were arrested. Several DVDs were removed by the officers, however, and Sam was charged with assaulting (by pushing) the officer who handcuffed him – though he says he never laid hands on said officer – and had to spend one night in jail. He sustained cuts to his wrist and bruises on his left rib, for which he was later brought to Singapore General Hospital for treatment.

Why did it happen?

We don’t know why the CID turned up at Raw and One Seven. For all I know, they’d received a tip-off that Mas Selamat was hiding out at a gay sauna – but more probably, they were investigating based on suspicion of drug use, pornography or prostitution.

Yet the procedure of the raid at One Seven throws up a host of questions. First: why wouldn’t the police explain why they were there? I’m not surprised they didn’t produce a warrant – they probably didn’t have one, since Singapore laws allow police to enter establishments without warrants to check on licences or stolen property. But shouldn’t they have explained what they were after – unless they were intent on hiding something?

Second: why did they resort to such violent means of investigation – shutting off the water mains, bursting in through the back door rather than the front door, and calling in additional police cars? They know about the function of the gay saunas – it’s no secret – so why did they bring along women police officers?

What these actions suggest is that one motive for the raids – a secondary motive, if not the primary one – was to chasten and humiliate the operators of gay saunas; to ensure that they were as compliant and obedient as the operators of Raw and to punish them further if they were as recalcitrant as Sam.

(Doubtless, Sam behaved unwisely in protesting the entry, but what happened to him reeks of injustice – though I’ve no way of knowing the truth behind the assault charges, I’d find it quite believable that the police fabricated them as they did in the case of Chee Siok Chin.)

Third: why, really, did the police start recording people’s identities? The fact that this happened only to a few patrons at only one sauna suggests that it was driven more by spite than by procedure. But the fact remains that although Section 377A wasn’t enforced – i.e. men weren’t prosecuted for gay sex – they were still being persecuted for it.

Is this what we’ve fought for? Is this the quality of the government’s assurances that the law’s only there for ceremonial purposes?

What does it mean?

The police in Singapore have a recent history of harassing owners of gay establishments – it happened in both 2006 and 2007 in conjunction with the IndigNation Pride Festival. (See http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-631.htm ).

And yet, this case is worse. You see, before this, I’d been able to correct my friends abroad whenever they exaggerated Singapore’s levels of homophobia. Yes, I’d tell them. We’ve got stupid laws, but no-one gets charged. We’ve got ignorant citizens, but very few of them are violently bigoted. We’ve got stupid censorship rules, but they’re slackening.

On the whole, I’d tell my friends, we’re getting better. Queer visibility and queer community-building are improving every year – ten years ago, we’d never have believed we’d have the levels of acceptance we do today.

But now – bam. We’ve got a sauna raid. This reverses seven years of progress in Singapore’s gay rights. Is this part of a new official policy? We don’t know. We’re back to living in fear.

And this comes right after that MDA censorship of a gay couple with a kid. As a gay man, it feels like I’m being attacked on both sides. The government doesn’t want me to be mature and have a stable relationship with a family. The government doesn’t want me to be slutty and have sex in saunas. What am I supposed to do? Turn straight? Go celibate? Or – more practically – emigrate?

We can emigrate, you know. Many of us gay men and women have skills that make us desired abroad. Imagine if we all left tomorrow: the arts scene, the design industry, the advertising companies, and a good lot of our sports teams – they’d break down. Bye-bye, Singapore the creative hub; hello, Singapore the dullest city in Southeast Asia.

Hopefully, I’m wrong. The problematic events of 25 April might not be driven by new homophobic policies, but simply by a few unprofessional, prejudiced individuals. Of course, that’d still mean that our police force doesn’t have enough checks and balances to address its abuses.

In the meantime, Minister of Home Affairs Mr Wong Kan Seng, do please keep your boys and girls in blue focused on important affairs like missing alleged terrorists and rapists and murderers and, oh, maybe even a little effort on petty crime would be a good idea. Why send them over to rough up a sauna? Let them behave with a little dignity.

And don’t give us gay people shit. You know this country needs us, and we can vote with our feet. Give us some respect.

Addendum:

A gay sauna, for those of you who need clarification, is a place where gay and bisexual men meet to have sex. And yes, before you ask, I’m aware that many people (gay and straight) find them disgusting.

Putting individual systems of morality aside, however, saunas cause no harm. These establishments are locations where consensual sex takes place, usually private and almost always with protection, presenting a safe alternative to outdoor cruising. Prostitution does not occur inside; social bonding and casual conversations do.

There are a number of gay saunas in Singapore, and several media exposés – tabloid newspapers and TV – have been done about them. The truth is, they’re old news, and they don’t get shut down because the government itself recognises their harmlessness.

(Yes, I myself have patronised these places. This of course means I am biased, but I wish to stand as a witness to their acceptability in society.)

Read also: Homophobia Part 1: The MDA censors the family

About the author:

Ng Yi-Sheng is a full-time freelance writer of poetry, drama, fiction, journalism, criticism and corporate hype. He is the author of the best-selling non-fiction book “SQ21: Singapore Queers in the 21st Century”, which was the first book of coming out stories in Asia to feature the real names and photographs of ordinary gay, lesbian and bisexual people.

—————–

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

包括四宗本土感染病例 我国再添六武汉确诊病例

卫生部宣布,我国再添六宗武汉肺炎确诊病例,包括四宗本地人感染病例,但是没有出现社区传播情况。 卫生部于今日(2月4日)下午2时发文告指出,我国的新型冠状病毒肺炎确诊病例已经达到24宗,其中有四名病患近期内都没有到过中国,包括一名印度尼西亚籍女佣。 第19名确诊患者为28岁的女性,在24号卡文路的永泰行工作,主要负责中国游客的保健产品公司接待工作。 她于1月29日出现喉咙痛和发烧症状,便到家庭诊所就医,隔日再到陈笃生医院紧急部门价差,但是其X光检测并没有显示任何肺炎症状,于是就回家。 随后她于1月31日至2月2日都待在惹兰红山(Jalan Bukit Merah)的住家内,但是却在昨日到新加坡中央医院就医时,被确诊患上武汉肺炎。她目前已经被列为可疑病例进行隔离,在中央医院的隔离房内留医。 而第19名患者的同事,同样没有到过中国的48岁女性,也于昨日被发现感染武汉肺炎。 居住在后港第61街的新加坡女子,目前也被安排到国家传染病中心的隔离病房内就医。 第21宗确诊病例患者是一名印度尼西亚籍的女佣,现年44岁,受雇于第19名病患。她是于2月2日出现武汉肺炎的症状后,目前已经被安排入住中央医院的隔离病房。 第22宗和第23宗确诊病例患者都是新加坡人,于1月30日自中国武汉回到我国。他们在飞机上时并没有出现任何症状,但是在抵达我国后进行了14天的隔离。 他们昨日进行的医疗报告显示了两人都患上了武汉肺炎,虽然没有出现任何明显症状,但是已经被安排到国家传染病中心的隔离病房接受治疗。…

【冠状病毒19】深圳进口巴西鸡翅外包测出病毒

据中国媒体报导,中国从巴西进口冷冻鸡翅,表面样品竟验出对冠状病毒19呈阳性反应,且该货物已经有部分流入中国广东。 据广西当地监督管理局表示,广州市新盾冷库肉有限公司,在冷冻鸡翅的外包装上发现冠状病毒19 。 据了解,该冷冻肉是从巴西进口至当地,而在冷冻鸡翅经过冠病检测是,部分表面样本呈阳性结果,而且该产品已有部分流入东兴市。 在接获消息后,东兴市疾控中心也立即出动,将三家冷冻食品销售点、三家餐饮店面,共19人密切接触过该批冷冻鸡翅的人进行排查、核酸检测,结果均呈阴性。 目前所有相关产品已封存,而已售出的产品则正在追查中。

五年前被指杀人、被引渡槟城关四个月 公民莫汉要向当局讨说法

“很多人都以为我杀了人… 我在工作场所众目睽睽下当众被逮捕,这是天大的耻辱。” 50岁的莫汉(Mohan Rajangam),原本在一家物流公司兢兢业业,但是五年前,他原本平静的日子却迎来了天翻地覆的可怕经历—-他被指控涉嫌一宗在马来西亚槟城发生的谋杀案,警方直接突击他的工作场所搜查并逮捕他,而后再被转交马国。 他在马国逗留长达四个月,但是马国法庭未提控他,最终因未涉及谋杀嫌疑被释放。然而这段经历却让他饱受煎熬,除了健康受影响,他也为此丢失工作。莫汉选择在生活重归轨道的五年后,才愿意口述自己的故事。 一切来得太突然 莫汉忆述,2015年的3月21日,近20名警官突然杀到他的工作地点,“我把我的身份证给他们看,然后他们带着我上公司三楼翻查所有事物,再为我上手铐,去翻查我的车,搜出我的护照”。他指警方搜查时没有说明任何理由。 较后他被押到广东民大厦,接着到肃毒局做尿检、被私会党取缔组问话。莫汉表示他如实告诉他所知的,两个部门都认为他与案子没关联,让他待在拘留处。 莫汉提及其中一位调查官在审问时态度非常恶劣,只是简单问他谋杀案发生当晚他在哪里、做什么,也没在手提电脑上做记录. 莫汉认为,直到罪证确凿,一个人都不应被当成犯人看待,而他感到有关调查官似乎已把他当作犯人;且在被拘留的48小时期间,也未有法律代表。 “48小时后,我以为他们要释放我…但他们为我的手脚上手铐,带我到法庭。其中一位传译员念到’我在2015年3月2日晚9时20分,我在乔治市枪杀一名印裔男子’,我忘了叫什么名。” 莫汉指的枪杀案,死者名为51岁的斯瓦古玛(E…

警员依精神健康法令 在宏茂桥城外逮捕一女子

本地社交媒体All Singapore Stuff分享,一名中国籍女子被拘捕,不过就有民众“路见不平”,质疑未有女警在场情况下,不应强硬将对方拘捕。 根据英语媒体《慈母舰》报导,警方证实在昨日(14日)下午4时43分接获投报,并依据精神健康法令逮捕一名43岁女子。 据社媒分享的短片显示,这名中国籍女子被拘捕,还高喊“警察打人啦!”,拍摄短片的男女则上前质问,为何需要数名男警员来拘捕一名弱女子。不过从短片可见,随后已有一名女警员赶到协助,但过程中这名女子仍有挣扎。 事件是发生在宏茂桥城(AMK Hub)外。男子与女伴继续和警方对质,不过警员也无奈展示被扯断的警员证,也表示他们在履行职责。 据警方回应,他们抵达现场时,这名妇女不肯合作,似乎情绪不稳定,还开始语无伦次喊叫。 由于女子站在路口转角处,为了女子和其他道路使用者安全,只得限制她的行动,并带到较安全地地方,较后也有女警到场协助。事件中也无人受伤。 警方也解释,警员有责任保护民众生命财产和维持秩序,为了履行职务,男警也获准在未有女警在场的情况下逮捕女性。