Singapore's rights bill falls short while media representation lags with Netflix cancellation.
ONE DOOR OPENS
The biggest news on LGBTI rights in the region this month came from Singapore, which is finally dropping its archaic criminalisation of gay sex.
It was indeed a call for celebration when PM Lee Hsien Loong announced that Section 377A -- the law which criminalises sex between men -- will be repealed. The announcement came during the National Day Rally 2022 on Aug 21 and was met with a round of applause by attendees.
"I believe this is the right thing to do, and something that most Singaporeans will now accept. This will bring the law into line with current social mores and, I hope, provide some relief to gay Singaporeans," said Lee.
Section 377A was introduced in the 1930s under British colonial rule. While it hasn't been actively enforced in decades, many believe its existence has long fuelled the stigma and discrimination against LGBTI people in Singaporean society. The repeal is definitely a welcome change. A sigh of relief has washed over the community in the past week, a long-overdue step taken on this road towards equality.
With news of the repeal, people are hopeful for the future. And many, of course, set their eyes on different possibilities that this growing acceptance could lead to, especially on marriage equality. It seems the government, too, has thought of this -- but not in the way that would be favourable to the LGBTI community. After announcing the repeal, PM Lee went on to say that most people -- regardless of their stance on the 377A -- don't want the repeal to trigger a change in social norms, namely the institution of marriage that is reserved for a man and a woman. This sentiment is shared by the government, he added.
So, to uphold and safeguard the institution of marriage, Lee announced that the definition of marriage will be protected from being challenged constitutionally in courts, effectively putting one roadblock in the path to same-sex marriage.
Is this a compromise? Relinquishing one thing and withholding another? This may be the most the government of a traditional and conservative society can give for now. It is still disappointing, definitely, and people are now expressing concerns over the prospect of marriage equality, which has just gotten more bleak. Still, it will not kill people's joy over the repeal -- not after decades of effort by the local LGBTI community and activists, and not after generations of LGBTI people who have had to suffer under 377A. No. This moment is still worth celebrating. It's still a momentous signal that says things can change and that they're changing. We just need to keep on believing and fighting for it.
DEFINING MOTHERS
On the occasion of Mother's Day, Johnson's Baby Thailand released the #HeartOfAMom campaign to spotlight different types of mothers who may not fit the social norms.
The campaign comes with a five-minute video featuring stories of different mothers -- among them are a "tom" mother who has a son with a gay man, and a mother who is a transgender woman. Released earlier this month, the video now has over 3.4 million views. The scene is set on Mother's Day, with the video exploring how some mothers feel excluded on this special day.
Society has a limited view on what makes a mother, and those who don't fit in are frowned upon. Benz and Day -- the LGBTI mothers in the video -- recalled how people would stare at them and some would even question whether their sexuality and identity would make them be able to raise their children well. Some also went as far as alleging that kids will be confused in these non-traditional families.
Wouldn't a kid be satisfied just to have a loving mother -- regardless of whether they're tattooed, poor or LGBTI? Must a mother -- and a "good" mother at that -- only be someone cisgender and heterosexual? Johnson's inclusive campaign insists that being a mother is defined by the heart that loves their child dearly, not their physical appearances, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression. Mother's Day can and should belong to every kind of mother.
STAKED THROUGH THE HEART
Netflix's First Kill was cancelled after just one season.
Despite much anticipation and a decent viewership, the sapphic teen vampire show was unfortunately killed off. The news broke this month to the surprise and disappointment of fans who were hoping for the show's renewal.
Premiered in June, First Kill revolves around the teen vampire Juliette and the vampire hunter Calliope who meet in high school and fall in love despite their warring families. Despite low critic scores, the drama peaked onto the weekly Top 10 list for English-language TV series in its first few days of release and eventually passed the 100 million views mark within its first 28 days. But it still wasn't enough to save the show.
Some fans have blamed the cancellation on what they claimed was the hate against blacks, lesbians and other reasons. Some also compared it to Netflix's other teen LGBTI show Heartstopper, which was renewed for two more seasons despite having lower viewership comparatively.
Reportedly, First Kill was dropped as its completion rate was not high enough. So, although many may have started watching the show, not enough people actually stayed to the end. This actually doesn't sound too surprising. Despite building on a promising premise that drew many viewers to it initially, First Kill turned out rather sloppy and felt more like a B movie in its execution. It also has low critic scores (although that has never stopped plenty of unnecessary sequels from being made).
Lesbian shows and films in general are hard to come by. That's a fact, especially when we compare that to countless BL and gay content being produced every year around the world. So when one lesbian show did arrive, it's understandable why people would want to cling on to it, praying it thrive and stay. Unfortunately, First Kill is not that show. We will mourn the discontinuation of a sapphic story, but I'm not sure it's necessary to mourn this story in particular.
