Singapore's LGBT "Historian" Proves "Not Born That Way" (Inadvertently Shows Support for 377A)

Singapore, an economic and cultural miracle in Southeast Asian, is facing some heavy cultural head  winds. One of the a number of countries around the world which still criminalizes sodomy.

What's interesting about Singapore it that the country is not a third-world backwater, but a first-world powerhouse in the region.

Furthermore, some of the most able minds in the country, whether in the university or in parliament have spoken out forcefully against homosexuality and have rigorously, effectively defended maintaining the anti-sodomy laws on the books.

For more information on Prof. Theo Li-Ann's spirited and well-informed defense, click here.

Recently, I discovered one of the oldest, most vocal pro-LGBT advocates--and activists--in Singapore.

His name is Roy Tan:

Mr. Tan Demanding Repeal of 377A in ... 2008!

Roy Tan is the so-called historian of LGBT in Singapore.

Really.

What kind of history does he have?

He shares it openly, and what he shares is nothing short of horrifying, providing proof that these behaviors are not innate, but rather acquired, and ultimately destructive.

Furthermore, his account on "Dear Straight People" shows not just the militant opposition to defending natural marriage and healthy intercourse among adults, but also why Singapore is doing the right thing to keep the anti-sodomy laws, aka 377A, on the nation's books.

First, let's look at his childhood, as told by himself, by the way:

Roy was just 5-years old when he first experienced same-sex attraction.

A five-year old having sexual feelings? This is unseemly and unfounded. The hormonal developments which invite sexual feelings and physical growth does not take place until puberty.

What does Tan claim that he had "same-sex attraction"? There is nothing wrong with fellow-feeling for other men. There is also nothing wrong with having a profound admiration or affirmation for someone of the same sex. Deep friendships are founded on that kind of love.

Trips to the swimming pool were a frequent family affair. And it was there that Roy had his first brush with homosexuality.

Reminder: we are talking about a child, a five-year old. This account is becoming more disturbing.

Tan shares:

I would stare in fascination at the men walking around in the changing room, especially at their bushy pubes and large genitalia – appendages which I noticed I lacked as a child.

I have heard a similar account to this.

Vincent Yang of Taiwan shared a similar story from his childhood:

In the first part of his testimony, Vincent talks about the disturbing effect of showering with older relatives in public showers. He noticed the erect members of his older sibling, and he became engrossed with the private parts of other men.

From this fascination, he entered into liaisons with men in public toilets, then one-night stands with other men. Like Vincent, Roy's "initiation" into same-sex attraction began in a public shower around other men, but notice also that Roy mentions a sense of shame: "appendages which I noticed I lacked as a child."

It's not a wise idea to have children shower around strangers. This sense of shame emerges, and it causes great harm in the future for the person. There is something wrong, even destructive, about allowing children, boys and girls, to be around so many naked strangers at one time. And that's what happened to Roy.

His attraction to the same gender grew stronger with age. By the time he started primary school, Roy was already busy experimenting with his male classmates.

"Same gender"? What? There is biological sex. That is a static, genetic characteristic. Why alter that?

Gender is the term used to suggest that male and female are mere constructs. That is not true.

"Experimenting"? Is that what the interview calls sexual conduct between boys? The attitude about this is all wrong from the outside. Children should not be "experimenting" with their bodies at all. The physical pleasure gives way to a sense of loss, shame, and longing which cannot be assuaged or ignored without something better.

I am still in shock reading "experimenting with his male classmates". This is tragic, and yet a very common feature in the lives of many homosexuals.

Roy shares:

"When I attended school from Primary 1 (First Grade in the United States) onwards, I always had a best friend in class which I would become strongly attracted to.

"We would proceed to explore each other’s bodies when the occasion was appropriate in a very innocent way, mainly out of curiosity. I had no inkling at the time that it was a sexual interaction."

"A best friend", Roy writes. He had many such encounters, then? Was there more than one "best friend"? This is really disturbing. Roy was abused, and now he is acting out this sense of shame on others. If a teacher in the United States found out that a child was behaving like this toward other students, the parents would have been informed immediately. I wonder if teachers in Roy's classes did find out about this.

I submit to you that Roy's interactions were not really "sexual", but rather a curiousity borne out by a lack of wisdom and training, particularly when it comes to boundaries. This kind of behavior is neither normal nor healthy among children. Especially first graders!

Despite the fact that Roy grew up at a time when gay apps haven’t yet permeated the gay scene, Roy was never short of company.

His peculiar trend of engaging in carnal activities with his best friend at each stage of his life was something that would continue right up through to his Army days.

This passage points out clearly that homosexuality is promiscuous. There is little in the way of fidelity or integrity when it comes to these kinds of interactions. Homosexuals have a number of sexual interactions with different men throughout their "tenure" in that lifestyle.

That does not sound like love. That does not sound like a set of behaviors to promote in any culture.

Then Rouy shares this:

"As I progressed from primary to secondary school and then pre-university and National Service, my best friend would change but the intensity of the relationship and the love I felt was the same with each new, unique person.

"The main problem about my relationships with my best friends was that even though we shared carnal pleasure, none of them identified as gay and they all got married to women later on in life."

Roy admits inadvertently, perhaps, but he admits it nonetheless: that people are not born gay. The men he slept with got married and had children later on. A number of studies do point out that women engage in homosexual encounters in certain settings, too, and then marry and have children. Men can engage sexually with other men, but then return to natural relations with women, too. Why would anyone want to disrupt this blessed arrangement?

Earlier in this post, I had asked about Roy's parents. Where were they when Roy was "experimenting" with other boys? Did they know about his homsoexual activities?

Yes, they did.

Born to a Buddhist family, his parents believed in the typical Chinese syncretism of Buddhism, Daoism and Confucianism. Thus, homosexuality was never considered a sin in the household and Roy was free from the religion induced guilt that haunts many other gay youths.

The sense of shame is a natural response. It's not the fault of "religion." Furthermore, this statement suggests Tan's hostility to people of faith. Very troubling.

During his twenties and thirties, Roy would often bring men back to his home to spend an intimate night with. Although his parents were well aware of what their son was doing behind closed doors, they never showed much of a reaction.

Or did they?

In fact, Roy's parents were quite indulgent! Roy shares:

“On one occasion when I brought a boy home for the night and was going down on him in my bedroom, my father peeped through the keyhole to see what we were up to.

“When I suddenly opened the door to go to the toilet, my father quickly stood up sheepishly from his crouched, spying position and walked away.”

Roy's father knew what his son was doing. Instead of doing something about it, he walked away. That is not love. No wonder Roy was looking for love in other men. What kind of father would allow his son to dishonor his body in such a fashion-and say nothing? That's just unloving, to say the least. 

The Bible, of course, calls such parental inaction "hate".

"He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes." (Proverbs 13:24)

Since his parents did not care that their son was so promiscuous, it really shows what little love they had for their son!

The "Dear Straight People" continues with details about Roy Tan's political activism. From the underground gay bars to chat boards to parades, Tan has taken every step possible to promote and normalize homosexual relations. He know serves as the unofficial LGBT historian for Singapore, as well.

Analysis:

First of all, Tan gives away the fact that homosexuality is not a stable affair. The behavior is rife with promiscuity. Second, it's a lifestyle which is demeaning to women. He was dating a women because of pressure, but spent so much of his time hanging out with one of his best friends. His girlfriend at the time was very annoyed about this. Tan recounts:

"She was rather envious of my best friend and would wonder why we spent so much time together.

"She used to ask, “Why do you always listen to him?” I didn’t have the heart to reply, “Because I love him more than you'".

How selfish is that?

But let's be candid here. Mr. Tan offers the argument which LGBT activists around the world are throwing out to the public: that being gay is a civil right.

It's certainly not an immutable characteristic, as proven by his carnal encounters with other men who went on to marry and have children.

The origins of this behavior stem from one who was not loved, not reared to be a strong, stable, capable adult. Just because homosexuals also engage in more noble pursuits (working, recreational activities, etc.) does not mean that 377A should be repealed.

Many people are functioning alcoholics, drug addicts, and even porn addicts. People commit other crimes in secret, and then go about their daily lives in public with little reason for scrutiny.

Prof. Thio Li-Ann, at one time a member if Singapore's Parliament, gave a rousing, comprehensive defense of 377A. Her words of wisdom and caution should be accepted and shared. For the entire speech, click here.

To summarize, Mr. Tan's defense of repeal for 377A leaves much to be desired. The behaviors are inherently destructive, the lifestyle draws individuals into aberrant, destructive patterns. Because the basis for LGBT as a civil right is based on the "born that way" argument, Mr. Tan has no real argument to make for striking down 377A.