Yeong Jun Bo Gabriel, a queer non-binary person from Singapore, was relieved when they heard the Prime Minister announce that the South-East Asian nation would repeal a decades-old ban on sex between men.
"I feel that it's a great step in the right direction and we deserve to celebrate and everybody should … celebrate the win for what it is," Mx Yeong, who was assigned male at birth, told the ABC.
Singapore's Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced last weekend that his government would move to repeal Section 377A of the country's penal code to bring it "into line with current social mores".
"There is no justification to prosecute people for it nor to make it a crime," Mr Lee said in a speech at the annual National Day Rally.
Mx Yeong, 28, said they were pleased the section was leaving the penal code, not just for them, but for queer youth.
"I think of it as one less thing to worry about but there are other things that we need to be looking at."
Benjamin Xue, co-founder and executive director of Singapore LGBT youth support organisation Young OUT Here, was part of a group of organisations that lobbied the government to change the colonial-era law.
Mr Xue said queer youth in the city-state could now "breathe a little easier".
"We need to recognise the fact that it has been an undue pressure on the lives of many gay men … so to have this weight being lifted off is a relief," he said.
Section 377A was introduced in 1938 under the British colonial government, criminalising sex between men, regardless of consent.
Although Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in 2007 that the government would not actively enforce 377A, there had been a number of challenges to the law over the last 15 years.
While each challenge brought repealing the law closer, none of them were ultimately successful.
A commitment to retain that law changed on Sunday when Mr Lee announced his government would repeal the section.
He cited changing societal expectations and a risk the law would eventually be struck down in court on the grounds it breached an equal protection provision in the constitution.
But in a move concerning some LGBT Singaporeans, Mr Lee said the government would also amend the constitution to define marriage as a union only between a man and a woman, to prevent future judicial challenges.
It means any change to legalise same-sex marriage would have to be passed by Singapore's parliament rather than come through the courts.
Section 377A 'suffocating' for LGBT Singaporeans
Mr Xue said the retention of Section 377A — even if it was not being enforced — was "suffocating" for LGBT youth and, for many, felt like "the air that you're breathing has an expiration date".
He said the announcement the constitution would be amended to remove a legal pathway to achieve same-sex marriage felt like a step backwards and "a big loss".
"Everything is in the hands of our parliamentarians," he said.
"That also means a harder job for us as community activists or community organisers to move minds and to change hearts."
Singapore lawyer Remy Choo said Section 377A had seen generations of gay Singaporeans branded criminals in the eyes of the law.
"It made a lot of LGBT Singaporeans feel targeted and uncomfortable and it had a real and actual impact when it came to everything from bullying in schools … to acceptance in broader society," he told the ABC.
Mr Choo, who helped launch high-profile legal challenges against the law, said the LGBT community would take time to absorb the decision and guard against any backlash from opponents of repealing 377A.
"Discrimination did not start with 377A and is not going to end with 377A," he said.
"There are a lot of issues that LGBT Singaporeans face in the workplace, in education policy, in media representation, and a lot of this discrimination traces its roots, not solely from, but in large part from 377A."
Human Rights Watch acting Asia director Elaine Pearson told the ABC removing 377A was a "big step forward" for Singaporeans.
Similar colonial-era laws against same-sex conduct exist in at least 67 other countries around the world, according to Human Rights Watch.
Punishments can range from imprisonment to corporal punishment and even death.
"I hope that other countries will look at the move that has been taken in Singapore and will also be inspired to repeal similar provisions that criminalise same-sex relations," Ms Pearson said.
There have been similar moves in countries across Asia to give LGBT people more rights.
India's Supreme Court overturned a law banning homosexual activity in 2018, Taiwan legalised same-sex marriage in 2019, Thailand introduced a draft bill on legalising same-sex unions this year and this month Vietnam declared homosexuality was "not an illness".
Ms Pearson said Singapore now needed to shift attention to reducing discrimination against LGBT people.
She said Singapore did not have anti-discrimination legislation on the basis of gender, sex or sexual orientation.
"We're hoping to see further steps to address discrimination against LGBT people because we know they continue to face discrimination in schools, workplaces and in accessing healthcare."
'A step forward a little late'
Reverend Miak Siew, who leads Singapore's LGBT-affirming Free Community Church, said he had been pushing to repeal Section 377A for 20 years but felt the announcement was "anticlimactic".
"It is something that is very symbolic but at the same time there are other things that are put in place that make us feel like this is coming with a lot of conditions," Reverend Siew said.
"I think that it is a step forward and it is a step forward a little late."
Reverend Siew conceded Singapore had some way to go before same-sex marriage was legalised because, he said, many people had not had the chance to interact with the LGBT community.
Opponents of repealing 377A argue changing the penal code will harm traditional family values and marriage, and that it will have an impact on the wellbeing of children.
In an op-ed written in Singapore's The Straits Times, conservatives Jason Wong and Mohd Khair said it would be "very unwise" for the government to repeal the law.
They argued the law helped "restrain advancing LGBTQ activism" and that children were better off in a family with a biological father and mother.
Reverend Siew said those arguments were often based on assumptions, misconceptions and misinformation about the LGBT community and that there was no difference between children raised by heterosexual or same-sex couples.
Mx Yeong said while recent developments had been positive, they were unsure whether they felt they had a future in Singapore.
"I can't say for sure whether Singapore would move completely forward but I'm hoping it will happen sometime."
