Breaking News: More Evidence On Biological Causes Of Homosexuality Found.

As all the ex-gay ministries parade their scientifically discredited causation theories on homosexuality, more scientific evidence on the innateness of homosexuality have been discovered. So with more truth on homosexuality coming out, perhaps it is high time ex-gay ministries admit the obvious before more people realise about the ex-gay myth: It is all lies.

Source: NewScientist

Brain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait. (emphasis added)

The scans reveal that in gay people, key structures of the brain governing emotion, mood, anxiety and aggressiveness resemble those in straight people of the opposite sex.

The differences are likely to have been forged in the womb or in early infancy, says Ivanka Savic, who conducted the study at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden.

"This is the most robust measure so far of cerebral differences between homosexual and heterosexual subjects," she says.

Previous studies have also shown differences in brain architecture and activity between gay and straight people, but most relied on people's responses to sexuality driven cues that could have been learned, such as rating the attractiveness of male or female faces.

Brain symmetry
To get round this, Savic and her colleague, Per Lindström, chose to measure brain parameters likely to have been fixed at birth.

"That was the whole point of the study, to show parameters that differ, but which couldn't be altered by learning or cognitive processes," says Savic.

First they used MRI scans to find out the overall volume and shapes of brains in a group of 90 volunteers consisting of 25 heterosexuals and 20 homosexuals of each gender.

The results showed that straight men had asymmetric brains, with the right
hemisphere slightly larger – and the gay women also had this asymmetry. Gay men,
meanwhile, had symmetrical brains like those of straight women.

The team next used PET scans to measure blood flow to the amygdala, part of the brain that governs fear and aggression. The images revealed how the amygdala connected to other parts of the brain, giving clues to how this might influence behaviour.

Depression link
They found that the patterns of connectivity in gay men matched those of straight women, and vice versa (see image, above right). In straight women and gay men, the connections were mainly into regions of the brain that manifest fear as intense anxiety.

"The regions involved in phobia, anxiety and depression overlap with the pattern we see from the amygdala," says Savic.

This is significant, she says, and fits with data showing that women are three times as likely as men to suffer from mood disorders or depression. Gay men have higher rates of depression too, she says, but it's difficult to know whether this is down to biology, homophobia or simply feelings of being "different".

In straight men and lesbians, the amygdala fed its signals mainly into the sensorimotor cortex and the striatum, regions of the brain that trigger the "fight or flight" response. "It's a more action-related response than in women," says Savic.

'Striking differences'
"This study demonstrates that homosexuals of both sexes show strong cross-sex shifts in brain symmetry," says Qazi Rahman, a leading researcher on sexual orientation at Queen Mary college, University of London, UK.

"The connectivity differences reported in the amygdala are striking."

"Paradoxically, it's more informative to look at things that have no direct connection with sexual orientation, and that's where this study scores," says Simon LeVay, a prominent US author who in 1991 reported finding differences (pdf) in a part of the brain called the hypothalamus between straight and gay men.

But as Savic herself acknowledges, the study can't say whether the brain differences are inherited, or result from abnormally high or low exposure in the womb to sex hormones such as testosterone.

Journal reference: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (DOI:
10.1073/pnas.0801566105)

Yuki's Thoughts:

I guess even when the dusk is settled, with more and more truths about homosexuality coming up, we would still hear more wacky ideas from ex-gays. But instead of simply admitting the ridiculous theories of distant fathers and overbearing mothers (and crossdressed by mother ala Edmund Smith); we would instead face up to more imposement of personal evaluation of values upon us, as stupid as their 'traditional values' sound. They would probably ask questions such as - can this be prevented during pregnancy? Ignorance AND Intolerance is bliss.

Yuki's Choice Reading:

Coverage and comments on this groundbreaking story also available on:

America's Box Turtle Bulletin and Asia's Fridae

Singapore Censors Healthy Same-Sex Depictions In Media.

Singapore, known for its glamorous first world city lifestyle displays third world mentality in the guise of the Media Development Authority (MDA), the country's primary moral guardian over presentation of arts and media in the republic. Earlier this decade, depictions of LGBT as a natural progression of society were banned or censored by the MDA from any arts and media broadcast within its jurisdiction.

Taiwan's highest grossing movie of 2004 “Formula 17”, a gay themed romantic comedy was banned from Singapore screenings for its potrayal of a “homosexual utopia, where everyone, including passersby, is homosexual and no ills or problems are reflected”. This starts a sad premise where true positive lives of LGBTs in the world today are considered unfit to be discussed and should be removed from existence.

The mantra supposedly changed in 2006 when the MDA chose to relax on its censorship in order to market itself as a arts and media centre for the region. This move allows top LGBT movies being shown uncut such as "Brokeback Mountain" and "Transamerica" in 2006. As recent as last year however, the MDA decided to grow a branch a year back in time.

A two-week exhibition of 80 same-sex kissing photos was cancelled after the MDA rejected the license on the grounds of “promoting the homosexual lifestyle” late last year. Early this year, part of the Oscar award acceptance speech by director Cynthia Wade for her documentary "Freeheld" was censored on its repeated broadcast because of its mention of equal rights for same-sex attracted individuals. Then the high profile LGBT documentary “A Jihad For Love” was also banned from public viewing.

From strictness, MDA then shows its absurdity, when they recently fined StarHub Cable Vision $10,000 Singaporean dollars for airing a commercial presenting a new song by artiste Olivia Yan called “Silly Child” which depicts two lesbians innocently kissing. The statement by the MDA reads:

Quote:

The commercial which was to promote a song by the singer, 阎韦伶(Olivia), was aired on MTV Mandarin Channel on 26 and 28 November 2007. Within the commercial, romanticised scenes of two girls kissing were shown and it portrayed the relationship as acceptable. This is in breach of the TV advertising guidelines, which disallows advertisements that condone homosexuality.

MDA also consulted the Advisory Committee for Chinese Programmes and the Committee concurred that the commercial had promoted lesbianism as acceptable and romantic, especially when shown together with the lyrics featured.

In that same month, MDA fined MediaCorp TV Channel 5 $15,000 Singapore dollars for airing a home improvement show called "Find and Design" that featured a gay couple who wants to renovate their game room into a nursery for their baby. The MDA statement here reads:

Quote:

The programme "Find and Design" is a home and decor series and in the episode concerned, the host helps a gay couple to transform their game room into a new nursery for their adopted baby. The episode contained several scenes of the gay couple with their baby as well as the presenter's congratulations and acknowledgement of them as a family unit in a way which normalises their gay lifestyle and unconventional family setup. This is in breach of the Free-to-Air TV Programme Code which disallows programmes that promote, justify or glamourise gay lifestyles.

MDA also consulted the Programme Advisory Committee for English Programmes (PACE) and the Committee was also of the view that a gay relationship should not be presented as an acceptable family unit. As the programme was shown on a Sunday morning, PACE felt that this was inappropriate as such a timeslot was within family viewing hours.

This two cases shows a blatant lack of knowledge and understanding of the homosexual condition as a sexual orientation by a shallow media guardian. It is deeply regretful for the LGBT community in Singapore who is still trying to find an illusive dignified social position in the republic, to be swept under the carpet by governmental agencies such as the MDA. Media is supposed to represent truth, and recent events portray the MDA as unable to accept and realise the unsurmountable truth: that homosexuals are normal human beings and exist in equivalence to any heterosexual conditions.

The Singapore MDA sent a loud and clear message to the world; any representation of homosexuals as sensitive individuals capable of love or as a capable well-adjusted family unit is not to be tolerated. Ignorance to the existence of gays and lesbians as ordinary human beings is to be educated. And self-praising in the form of a rap video is the way to go while the artistry and talent of LGBT is to be shipped to Australia. Interesting step backward indeed, for an agency bent on proving their nation's worth as a international media hub.

Australia's first openly lesbian minister... and she is from Malaysia....

From The Star newspaper, Malaysia:

Malaysian-born Penny now Aussie minister

By MUGUNTAN VANAR

KOTA KINABALU: The father of Malaysian-born Penny Wong Ying Yen who has been appointed as a Cabinet minister in Australia is thrilled with his daughter’s political success.

“I am very happy. I hope her appointment will be a blessing for Australia,” said Francis Wong Yit Shing, 66, an architect here.

The 39-year-old Penny, who was born in Sabah but grew up in Australia from the age of eight with her mother, was yesterday named Climate Change and Water Minister by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd whose Labor party won the recent elections.

Penny Wong Yin Yeng
Francis, who described his daughter as a go-getter, said that the portfolio given to his daughter was very “current and important” not only for Australians but for everyone concerned about global warming and climate change.

“I know she is a very responsible person and she will work hard to achieve her objectives,” said Francis, who keeps in touch with his daughter through SMS.

He said he never expected her to become a politician.

“I wanted her to be a doctor and she enrolled for it. A year later she switched to law after going on a student exchange programme to Brazil where she saw the need to help people,” said Francis.

Proud as punch: Francis and Penny keep in touch via SMS and mostly talk about family matters.
On completing her studies, she became involved in unions and industrial court cases in Australia.

Penny became the first Asian-born woman Senator when she won a seat in South Australia in 2002.

Last week’s Australian elections saw her winning a second term with her party toppling John Howard’s government.

Asked if he had ever given his daughter any political advice, Francis said the politics that he knew about was only that of South-East Asia.

“We mostly talk family matters.”

Francis said Penny and her mother left Sabah for Australia in 1977 for Penny’s education while he remained in the state.

Over time, he and his wife separated and Penny took up Australian citizenship.

(Of course, Malaysia being Malaysia, they would definitely delete primary and important facts from their media reporting. But the rest of the world knows, and the LGT community is proud to herald the first openly lesbian minister in Australia. And in Australia under Kevin Rudd, we are happy to announce it:)

Ladies Lead PM Rudd's Top Team

"Ms Wong a South Australian senator, will be Australia's first openly lesbian minister."

More links on Penny Wong below. If Malaysia is not fully proud of you, we are!

Fridae

Sydney Morning Herald

PinkNews

Yuki thoughts: I just find it amazing, my home country can be so prideful about having an ex Malaysian making it so big outside the country, but did not question why this rising star of world politics is not plying her trade here and conveniently help closet her true sexual orientation from fellow Malaysians. What the... (sigh)

(This story is so interesting, in addition relates to my position as a Malaysian in Australia; so I posted it in both here and 'reflectionsasia'. Feel free to comment.)

Singapore PM: gay sex laws retained because ''that's the way many singaporeans feel''.

The Singaporean message to the world in bold, commentary in brackets:

Source: http://www.fridae.com/newsfeatures/article.php?articleid=2042&viewarticle=1

PM Lee Hsien Loong reiterates that although "gayness is mostly something in-born” and "a personal matter," Section 377A will be retained because “that's the way many Singaporeans feel" it should be so.

A law undergraduate queried Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who was speaking to university students at a Ministerial Forum on Friday night, about the government’s decision to retain current laws that criminalise “gross indecency” between men despite its promise to not use it against consenting adults.

PM Lee explained that the government had to recognise that many people in Singapore were strongly against the decriminalisation of Section 377A which provides for a jail sentence for up to two years should a man is found to have committed "an act of gross indecency" with another man, either in public or private.

"If everybody felt like you in Singapore...we could change 377(A), and we would decriminalise gay sex.

(The results of a poll in 2000 on gay law issues in Singapore shows that almost everybody agreed they should decriminalize it: http://www.sodomylaws.org/world/singapore/sinews001.htm

Finally, the survey asked about the current "crimes against nature" law, which most other former British colonies have long since repealed but which in Singapore prescribes punishments as harsh as life imprisonment. Recently a heterosexual male was convicted of sodomy against his former girlfriend, but acts between two women have never been prosecuted. Specifically, respondents were asked if they believed that oral sex between homosexual adults in private should be restricted. Restrictions were opposed by 39% of those interviewed on the street and supported by 29%. Among Internet respondents, fully 78% opposed restrictions and only 16% supported them.)

(So where is the 'majority'?).

"It's a very divisive issue, our view or my view is that gayness is mostly something in-born; some people are like that and some people are not. How they live their own lives is really for them to decide, it's a personal matter.

"But the tone of the society, the public, and society as a whole, should be really set by the heterosexuals and that's the way many Singaporeans feel.

(So it means heterosexuals in Singapore is now publically given a superior status in society of Singapore to tone the society, the public and society? Heterosexuals are now the sexual orientation police in Singapore. Asexuals beware.)

"Gay people exist. We respect them, and they have a place in our society. But (for) Section 377A, to change that, will be a very divisive argument. We will not reach consensus however much we discuss it.

(Just how divisive is it? Well, they just do not wish to divide the church and the state, especially when the fundies make noise about their bigotry. Therefore it is better to have Christianity as the superior religion than Buddhists in Singapore, even thought there are around 3 Buddhist for every one Christian: http://www.k12academics.com/singapore_demographics.htm

Singapore is also a multi-religious country, due mainly to its location on one of the world's major transportation routes. More than 40% of Singaporeans profess adherence to Buddhism. The large percentage may be due to a lack of distinction between Taoism and Buddhism; Taoism, Confucianism, Buddhism, and ancestral worship are merged into one religion by most of the Chinese population. Most Muslims are Malay.

Christianity in Singapore consists of Roman Catholicism and various Protestant denominations, and comprises approximately 14% of the population. Other religions include Sikhism, Hinduism and the Baha'i Faith followed mainly by those of Indian descent.

The demographics may be a bit old but still strong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Singapore

The influence of the Christian religion on political issues is really immense: http://www.straitstimes.com/ST+Forum/Online+Story/STIStory_160086.html)

"The views are passionately held on both sides. The more you discuss it, the angrier they become. The subject will not go away.

"Our view, as a government is, we will go with society. We will not push forward as society's views shift. We just follow along. As of today, my judgement is: the society is comfortable with our position. Leave the clause (alone). What people do in private is their own business; in public, certain norms apply."

(The only people that would be angry our Christians churches. And looking at the other heterosexual law that had been ammended to allow sodomy among heterosexuals: http://www.out.co.nz/pages/outnews2.asp?ref=5702 . Where are your voices, oh mighty Singapore Christian Church? Do you Christian heterosexual men and women of "God" kept quiet because you wish to engage in anal sex and oral sex, and are joyous that your Christian homosexual brethren are unable to do so?

In a report last week, Member of Parliament Sin Boon Ann, supported the retention of the laws when asked to comment about a survey conducted by Singapore's Nanyang Technological University. The survey, which was done in January 2005, found that seven in 10 people held negative attitudes about gay men and lesbians.

(Of course: http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2007/09/why-homosexuality-should-be.html

Anyway, the study is here: http://www.ntu.edu.sg/corpcomms2/news/ST_070920_H10_7%20in%2010%20frown%20on%20homosexuality.pdf

This seems rather strange, and already highly suspectful, considering Singapore's position as a liberal nation fearful enough to cause an ex-gay in Singapore (now in Malaysia) to ask his parroting little chickens not to go to Singapore.

And where exactly are the test subjects from? There should be questions on this study because of all their efforts on asking the 1,000 persons for their opinion, while also getting their religions status, the percentage from the thousand of those from religions like Christianity is not revealed. Can someone fill us in on this, or it is supposed to remain shrouded in doubt.)

The findings showed that 68.6 per cent of the respondents 'generally held negative attitudes,' 22.9 per cent had positive attitudes and 8.5 per cent were neutral.

(But at least in the link above, they admitted this: On average, Christians and Muslims were seen to hold 'significantly more negative attitudes' than Buddhists or freethinkers.)

Sin, who is head of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Community Development, Youth and Sports said: "We are a conservative society and will not be trailblazers in this regard."

He added that the decision to keep the laws was a "statement of values" rather than a "statement of rights and obligations."

(The statement of values should consider on a broader thought about homosexuality. Since it is announced vividly in Singapore that homosexuals exist, why put the foot in the mouth by obviously saying 'Homosexuals are not allowed to have sex, even anal and oral. Heterosexuals can have any sex they want'. Is such blatant discrimination, and imposing a superiority over a minority, a value?)

This is despite the fact that Singapore is the only developed country to have laws criminalising sexual activity between men. Like Singapore, Malaysia and India inherited similar laws from its British colonial past while former colony Hong Kong had scrapped its laws criminalising gay sex in 1991.

---------------------

(There were two strong worded letters sents to the press in separate times: The anti-gay letter by Yvonne Lee was apparently rebutted by her boss and vice dean Victor Ramraj of the same university they belong to.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/IE17Ae01.html

Her letter, and presumably another rebuttal by a Mr. Ravi, here:

http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/Vantage_MRavi.html)

Gay Sex Laws To Stay: Singapore Government.

Source: http://www.fridae.com/newsfeatures/article.php?articleid=2038&viewarticle=1&searchtype=all

Despite efforts to lobby against the retention of gay sex laws in the city-state's first major penal code amendments in 22 years, the gay community will have to bear double the insult as the laws will sit between proposed laws against necrophilia and bestiality.

Under a Bill introduced in Singapore's parliament on Monday, current laws criminalising sex between men will be retained although laws criminalising oral and anal sex between heterosexuals will be repealed.

The proposed amendments, which was made available to the public since Nov 9 last year, will see no change to Section 377A which provides for a jail sentence for up to two years should a man is found to have committed “an act of gross indecency" with another man, either in public or private.

The Penal Code (Amendment) Bill, which was read the first time in Parliament on Monday, codifies the existing Section 377A “Outrages on decency” between the new Section 377 “Sexual penetration of a corpse" and Section 377B “Sexual penetration with living animal."

In April, the Law Society of Singapore said in its official feedback to the proposed amendment of the Penal Code that “the retention of s.377A in its present form cannot be justified” and recommended the section to be repealed.

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) was quoted as saying in the Straits Times today that public feedback on the issue had been “emotional, divided and strongly expressed,” with the majority calling for the section to be retained.

"MHA recognises that we are generally a conservative society and that we should let the situation evolve," MHA said.

Ms Indranee Rajah, former chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Law and Home Affairs, reiterated the MHA’s “assurance” that it would not actively prosecute people under that section.

“But in recognition of the fact that there is still quite a strong majority uncomfortable with homosexuality, the section must stay,” she said.

In April, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew surprised many when he questioned the city-state’s ban on gay sex.

"If in fact it is true, and I have asked doctors this, that you are genetically born a homosexual — because that's the nature of the genetic random transmission of genes — you can't help it. So why should we criminalise it?" He told a youth rally.

In a recent International Herald Tribune interview, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said: “China has already allowed and recognised gays, so have Hong Kong and Taiwan. It's a matter of time. But we have a part Muslim population, another part conservative older Chinese and Indians.”

Other advocates of repeal include Member of Parliament Baey Kam Keng and Nominated Members of Parliament Siew Kum Hong who both spoke against keeping Section 377A on the books at a public forum on the issue in July.

Another amendment that has attracted intense debate is Section 375 which defines spousal rape. Under the proposed amendment, a man is deemed to have not broken any laws if he rapes his wife unless she is living separately from him, has filed for a separation/divorce or applied for a protection order from the court.

Other amendments include the proposal to criminalise "sexual grooming" of minors under 16 by adults above 21 years of age who have “met or communicated with the minor on 2 or more previous occasions” as well as Singaporeans who have sex with minors under 18 locally and overseas (Section 376). Local media have reported that around 600 men travel from Singapore to the nearby Indonesian island of Batam each weekend for sex with teenaged girls.

The second reading is scheduled for Oct 17 when Parliament will debate on the Bill.

Yuki's thoughts: I am going to let a commentator of the topic of the above site to share his thoughts. He could not have said it any better :-

rockhudson says :

Just two days ago in Singapore's Parliament, the Minister for Home Affairs was tabling the admendments to the Penal Code (Chapter 224). Widely expected revisions were provisions for racial or religious hate crimes, removal of mandatory punishments and changes to the archaic unnatural sex statute. However, one significant part of the unnatural sex law have again failed the review. This time however, the Penal Code is being refined in definition, which is much needed. For instance, rape was previously defined as forced sexual intercourse on a woman by a man, now sexual intercourse will be defined as the penetration of the penis into the vagina only, and previously it was impossible to rape a man, now there is a new section for sexual assault by penetration (Section 376). This new provision however further punches holes into the Government's argument for the retention of Section 377A, for in future sexual intercourse with a male minor with or without his consent, will be persecutable under Section 376 and Section 377A, resulting in possible double jeopardy, and more so if the male minor is under 16 (Section 376A). Not only is having consensual sex with a male minor illegal henceforth but also the communication prior to the act is punishable, even if the act never did happened.

Many groups have called for the repeal of the archaic unnatural sex laws, including from sectors within the government itself, so why did the Ministry only introduce admendments to Section 377 and not Section 377A? This is without a shadow of doubt, the high-handed government-endorsed oppression and discrimination of the gay community. The government is never one to be held down by public opinion, not even by opposition to their unpopular policies no matter how sensitive it may be, willingly sacrificing any sacred cows in the name of progress, so why have they been so attentive to the anti-homosexual camp on this one particular sensitive issue? Interestingly, anal and oral sex is perfectly fine for heterosexuals but not for homosexuals, for reasons that cannot hold any water. Previously, the criminalisation of unnatural sex acts was justified by that Singapore is a conservative society and that all religions and cultures in Singapore don't endorse such unnatural and unproductive practices. If so, why have such anti-conservative and unproductive sexual acts be permissible between heterosexuals now? Need I say more.

This is not part of the "homosexual agenda", nor is it about the gay minority, but it is an issue of civil liberties. If the government can choose to refuse a law-abiding group such fundamental rights, what else can they not do? The government is clearly using the Law to discriminate and oppress the gay minority, otherwise how do you explain this situation? The Law is supposed to protect the discriminated and the disadvantaged, not to perpetuate their suffering and indignation. Like how the US Supreme Court held up civil liberties during the 60's in the face of majority opposition for equal rights for the blacks and other minorities, similarly the government should make full use of their high moral ground and strong mandate, and work towards a more inclusive society and for the good of every citizen, gay or straight.

Unhealthy Heterosexual Lifestyle: 'Come Back To Me' singer Vanessa Hudgens outed.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

He's My Daughter.

I was going to write about this:

http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2007/9/9/lifefocus/18791364&sec=lifefocus

But then a thought came to me.

This is probably one of the only few articles that talk to us. Other than that, most articles talk about us, without us.

Most articles by the uninitiated and unleant talk like they are experts in who we are without even being trained in the issue of transgenders. They mostly do not even know any of us, It is in fact, tiring and frustrating to have these people not even having dialogues with us, or at least even diligently study about these issues. They just make up their own conclusions with their own minds and call it 'science' based on their own shallow logic.

In Malaysia, there are talk about rehabilitation centres for transgenders, even male hormone therapy for us, which is utterly ridiculous. Perhaps what the article says is true, Malaysia is the worst country for transgenders to live. At least elsewhere in Asia, our talents, education and experience, will be accounted for.

It is my hope, that acceptance for people like us, would happen before I pass on.

Malaysia's Muslim transexuals battle sex change woes.

Some of us sisters are more fortunate than others:

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=featuresNews&storyid=2007-09-03T024445Z_01_KLR290147_RTRIDST_0_LIFESTYLE-MALAYSIA-TRANSEXUALS-DC.XML

By Liau Y-Sing

KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) - When Khartini Slamah first came out as a transexual, he was a dutiful Muslim son by day and a prostitute by night, working on the streets of the Malaysian capital.

The option of sex change surgery was out of the question in this moderate Muslim country where Muslim transexuals are banned from changing their gender and same sex relationships are a criminal offence.

"I tried to find a job but because of my sexuality I was turned down," said the 44-year-old former prostitute who now works as an activist and counsellor to other transexuals.

Twenty years later, sex change surgery may be routine in some countries but it's still banned by law in Malaysia -- at least for Muslims. The ruling doesn't apply to non-Muslims who make up about half of the estimated 30,000 transexuals in Malaysia.

The ban stems from an Islamic belief that it is wrong to alter that which God has given. This belief also forbids Muslims from dressing up as the opposite sex and undergoing major cosmetic surgery other than for medical reasons.

Non-Muslims don't have the same problems, although they do sometimes have trouble registering their new gender with the state and like their Muslim counterparts, many have to work as prostitutes as there are few job opportunities for transexuals.

Malaysia's transexuals are in a legal limbo.

In February 2005, a Malaysian court allowed a non-Muslim male transexual to change the gender on his identity card after he showed medical evidence of sex-change by surgery, media reports said at the time.

But later that year, the government declared as invalid the marriage of a couple in which the wife was a non-Muslim man who had undergone sex change surgery, saying it was a same-sex union.

"We are tolerant of them (transexuals). But whether we will have laws that will protect them -- I don't think with the conservative nature of our culture -- that we will," said criminologist P. Sundramoorthy.

For Khartini, dressed in a flowing lilac tunic with his feet squeezed into stiletto heels, the conflict between sexual identity and religion is sometimes too hard to bear.

"We are all in a dilemma. We are Muslims. They say this is not allowed, but they never tell us what are the options. I felt like it's being used to oppress. But I know that religion, Islam is so flexible...," said Khartini, a practicing Muslim.


INNATE OR IMBUED?

Despite its modern exterior, Malaysia remains conservative. Capital Kuala Lumpur -- a bustling metropolis dotted by towering skyscrapers, flashy art galleries and riotous gay bars -- has a deeply religious underbelly.

U.S. singer Gwen Stefani was forced to cover up her usually revealing stage costumes when she performed recently in Kuala Lumpur after Islamic groups expressed fears she could corrupt the country's youth.

Government plans to introduce sex education in schools and to give free needles and condoms to drug addicts provoked a fierce debate, with some religious leaders saying this would promote promiscuity.

The past few decades have seen a rise in religious fervour among Muslims in Malaysia, with an increase in the popularity of Islamic banking and more women eschewing Western attire in favour of traditional Malay dress and headscarves.

Transexuals are still social outcasts, the victims of physical abuse and verbal harassment by the public, police and religious authorities, who advocate counselling and the use of hormone injections to suppress transexuals' inclinations.

"We very much encourage them to return to their original form," said Abdullah Md Zin, a minister for religious affairs. "We cannot accept them."

Transexuals say their preferences are innate.

"There's something biological," said Teh Yik Koon, a criminologist and sociologist. "In my research, there are those as young as three, four years old, who don't feel as if they fit into their assigned gender role."

Few doctors perform gender realignment operations in Malaysia so those seeking the surgery must pay exorbitant prices abroad. Muslims, who make up 60 percent of Malaysia's 26 million population, risk being brought before Islamic courts, which under Malaysian law hear civil cases involving Muslims.

Islamic cleric, Mohamad Asri Zainul Abidin, one of Malaysia's most moderate Muslim leaders believes transexuals should be fined or jailed if counselling proves ineffective at deterring them.

"We must try to reform them and give them advice. We must not allow them to stray," said the cleric. "Imagine if this world were filled with transexuals -- what would happen to the human race?"

Yuki's thoughts: I am proud of Malaysia for its first class facilities. But I am ashamed of Malaysia for its third class mentality.

Jesus image in Tamil daily.

Anger at Malaysia 'Jesus cartoon'.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6960220.stm

A Malaysian newspaper is facing calls to shut down after it published an image of Jesus holding a cigarette and what appeared to be a can of beer.

Malaysia's Muslim-led government closed two publications last year for carrying controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

Now some members of Malaysia's minority religions say they want the same treatment over this latest incident.

Religion is a famously sensitive subject in Malaysia.

So when Tamil-language newspaper, Makkal Osai, published a picture on its front page apparently showing Jesus smoking and drinking it was bound to cause offence.

Christian groups said that although the Jesus of the Bible was a compassionate figure - who turned water into wine, shared a flagon with his disciples at the Last Supper and mixed with tax collectors and prostitutes - action should still be taken.

The paper has since issued an apology, explaining that a graphics editor had mistakenly taken the image from the internet. Most of Malaysia's churches appear to have been appeased.

Not so though the Malaysian Indian Congress, an ethnic Tamil political party in the governing coalition, most of whose members are Hindu.

A senior party official has demanded that Makkal Osai's editor be sacked and the paper closed.

Interestingly, Makkal Osai has been very critical of the Malaysian Indian Congress, which owns a rival Tamil-language newspaper.

Non-Muslims are also waiting to see how the government responds, given that it took tough action over the publication of the Prophet Muhammad cartoons.

Yuki's thoughts: I do not see what the incident has got to do with the Malaysian Indian Congress, a chance for political revenge justified by religion? Strange.

Other source and links:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Malaysia-Jesus-Picture.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

God, Gays, Plugs and Sockets.

From The Malta Independent Online:
http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=56117

God, Gays, Plugs and Sockets by Daphne Caruana Galizia

In the correspondence pages of another newspaper, a debate is going on about whether God loves gays and whether homosexuality is ‘allowed’ (apparently, it isn’t). Yes, really. You wouldn’t believe it, would you? We’re in the 21st century and in the European Union, and still there are many among us who are much taken with these medieval themes. I suppose they are the sort of people who have never recovered from the decriminalisation of sexual acts between people of the same gender. While they might not actually approve of the execution of homosexuals in Iran, they sympathise with the spirit of that thinking.

What amazes me is the literalism with which this subject is debated in the context of Catholic doctrine and biblical teaching. The various writers of letters to the newspaper speak as though we are living in a theocracy, where religious teaching is the law of the land: “The Bible says…”; “Jesus said…”; “The Catholic Church tells us…”; “Catholic doctrine teaches…”. They make not even a passing reference to secular law, as though it is something nasty imposed on this country by outsiders, the law of a coloniser, there to be resisted, ignored or honoured in the breach. They speak as though the only laws that count for them are the rules laid down by the Vatican. They know no others. Despite the decriminalisation of homosexual sex many years ago, here they are, still insisting to whoever will listen that homosexuals of all shape, hue, stripe and religion must never have sex unless they are married to somebody of the other gender.

It is one of the first things noticed by the more literate ‘outsiders’ in Malta and the Maltese who have been away for a long time: the unremitting use of Jesus and the Church as a reference point for behaviour, in the correspondence pages of all our newspapers and even in private conversation. I recently met a woman who returned to Malta for a visit after having lived elsewhere in Europe for 30 years. She was astonished to find that her former school-friends, who are in their late 50s, discuss morality using the terminology of school doctrine classes, and with the same mindset. Aside from the fact that this points to a lack of intellectual development – what I call the ‘foot-binding of the mind’ that was performed on Maltese women until the current generation, it is as though the law and secular morality do not exist.

Whip away the moral framework of Catholic teaching, and these people founder. Without clear instructions from their books of doctrine, they don’t know the difference between wrong and right. They have no parameters for decent behaviour. The teaching of morality within an exclusively religious context is one of the main reasons why so many people here are sleazy, untrustworthy, prone to sharp behaviour which they interpret as cleverness, disloyal, corrupt, and generally lacking those qualities which an older generation describes as irgulija.

When they drop their religion, or more precisely their religious fear of divine retribution, they are unconfined by any standards of behaviour.

If they were taught that something is wrong because Jesus said so, and not because it is intrinsically wrong for reasons that are entirely secular, then when they no longer believe in Jesus, they no longer believe that the thing is wrong. The growth in the number of fervent believers in prayer groups is just the flip-side of the coin. The other side is the growth in the number of people who don’t believe in anything at all, except grabbing as much as they can on their way out.

The debate about whether homosexuals are freaks of nature, people who are essentially “wrong”, genetic mistakes who persist in perversity instead of hiding themselves away in solitary chastity, brings to the fore another class of people behaving badly. They are the ones who think that because they have the Vatican on their side, they can tell us who is allowed and who isn’t allowed, whom God loves and doesn’t love, and who we are allowed to have sex with or not. The only response to that kind of thing is the equally rude “Shut up and mind your own business”, but apparently there are those who cannot resist the temptation to engage these relics of a different world in debate. How can they ever hope to convince them with logic and argument? It’s impossible. The only thing to do with such people is to ensure that they are never in a position of power over others. Fortunately, there are legal and political safeguards against the return of the Inquisition.

You cannot use logic with people who are essentially illogical in their thinking. It doesn’t have any effect. Religious faith, intolerance and overwrought emotions have in-built defences against logic. The most common argument they use is that homosexual sex is evil in the eyes of God because it is “barren” and can never produce a child. Yet there is no parallel teaching that copulation after the menopause is evil in God’s eyes – on the contrary, women whose child-bearing days are long past are urged to have sex with their husband on demand “because it is their duty”.

Anyway, I’m not going to get into that, because it’s too irritating, and I’m sure that these people are the exception, not the rule. Most of us realise that the sexual life of others is none of our business, unless it involves coercion or children. What I do find even more astounding is the way these people are completely out of step with reality, and they don’t even realise it. Even the new generation of priests don’t speak or write like that, and yet here we have all these God-bothering lay-people, presuming to instruct and condemn. One woman wrote to quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church – a book that is up there with the worst of them in creating discord, division, pettiness and prejudice. My own attitude towards the Catechism is that anyone who needs a book of instructions so as to know how to be a good person and behave well is a lost cause to start with. How can any person, as this woman did, write to the newspapers to quote this particular gem from her Catechism book? “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” She even gives the reference: 2357.

I suppose the Catechism of the Catholic Church – I wouldn’t know, because I threw my copy away long before I left school, having had absolutely no interest in it – has no instructions on how far one should go in causing severe offence to others who are doing nobody any harm. That would be why the Catechism-quoting newspaper correspondent found nothing wrong in writing this: “The physical anatomy of two men does not complement each other and neither does that of two women. It is like having two electrical sockets on a wall which, no matter how close they are to each other, are unable to generate light.” Yes, I know – it’s unbelievable, more so when you consider that this is a middle-aged woman who, intellectually, has not moved an inch beyond the primitive thinking of metaphors and examples from “everyday life” of the MUSEUM classroom of childhood. And then there was this: “Homosexual behaviour fails to achieve… the continuation of the human race. No homosexual couple can ever generate a child. There are certainly heterosexual couples who are, unfortunately, infertile – but this is not the norm. So much so that a village hypothetically inhabited solely by homosexual couples will eventually disappear while one peopled by heterosexual couples will not.”

This is not just profoundly insulting, like the crass comment about plugs and sockets. It is also profoundly ignorant, and displays some very confused thinking about fertility. Homosexual people are not infertile, unless it is for the same reasons that affect the fertility of heterosexual people. Homosexual women come equipped with the same array of reproductive equipment as heterosexual women, and homosexual men – this might not be taught at the MUSEUM – produce sperm in the same way that heterosexual men do (oh, surprise, surprise). So where is the infertility? Many homosexuals choose to have children, and do so. Many homosexual men are regular donors to sperm banks and have, with supreme irony given our newspaper correspondent’s arguments, fathered the children of women whose heterosexual husbands couldn’t do so.

Whether you approve or not is beside the point; the point is that being homosexual does not make you infertile. It only makes you unable to have a child with your partner. Equally, there are only rare examples of “infertile couples”, though there are many infertile individuals. And I just love that bit about the hypothetical village of homosexuals. There are so many other interesting examples of hypothetical villages that I can come up with, starting with a hypothetical village of interfering busybodies who insist that we all live by their Catechism. Why not round them up and get them all to live together, so that the rest of us can live in peace? Then they could live their lives in bliss, policing each other and reporting the neighbours to the Vatican’s Sex Police.

Ah, but I love even more the confident assertion that a village of heterosexual people will never die out. Give this woman some books to read other than the Catechism. Give her documentaries to watch. Take her on trips abroad, or even on a little tour of our own tiny islands. The world is full of the ghost-sites of villages that have died out, and presumably they weren’t all inhabited solely by well-groomed men with a keen interest in art and dance or women in baggy tracksuits and no make-up. Entire races and civilisations have died out, not just villages – for a great variety of reasons, including the one that we are experiencing now: the fact that people are fertile and heterosexual does not mean that they will have children. Practically every couple in the Maltese Islands is having sex that is every bit as barren, to use the terminology favoured by the Catechism-quoters, as homosexual sex. If they’re not using one of a variety of forms of contraception, as the vast majority are doubtlessly doing, then they are having sex in the Church-approved “safe period” – another exercise in illogical thinking, because the only reason that it is “safe” is precisely because it is “not open to life”. Our negligible birth rate is not the result of people “turning” homosexual, but the result of people having sex only when they know that conception is out of the question.

What is perhaps most interesting about all these people who write to the newspapers to quote the Catechism at us is their assumption that everyone is obliged to live by the rules of Catholic teaching. It doesn’t occur to them for one minute that it is only Catholics who are obliged to live by those rules. Everyone else, including the legions of lapsed Catholics in this country, can do precisely as they please, within the limits of the law and common decency. Even Catholics can do as they please, because there is no Inquisition to force them to stick to the rules.

Yuki's thoughts: God's peace and love for mankind should overpower everything.

Finally, something that gets us thinking.

"christian popes had murdered alot of scientists long ago just because they denied what the popes told the society .. the scientists tried to tell the truth (ex. earth spins round the sun) but the popes killed them to protect themselves so the society will bow to them.. but eventually they realised that christian had taught so much shit which they themselves ashamed to admit that they used to believe it. " - mie, Malaysia Today.

In reference to an uproar in Malaysia in regards to a pastor setting up a liberal church in Malaysia:

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/8/10/nation/18542335&sec=nation

Rev. Ou Yang Wen Feng was ordained just a few months back at the Metropolitan Community Church, New York.

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/5/29/nation/17864607&sec=nation

Some Christians would still argue homosexuality as a sin, just as decades to centuries ago, we used to argue that the earth is flat and the sun revolves around it, we can have slaves among countries around our nations, blacks are children of a lesser God and so forth.

I watched a movie yesterday called 'Walk The Line'. It is about the lives of Johnny Cash and June Carter. June Carter was judged throughout the movie by some Christian sections as an adulteress, all because she is divorced (it is the thinking back in the 1950's that if you are divorced, it is most probably because you committed adultery with another men) But today, 50 years on, such misconception no longer exists. We would move with times, but not with homosexuality. We give every reason to why the old laws of Leviticus could not be applied at our times now, but totally singling out homosexuality. Why?

I read a comment on ex-gaywatch which struck me as one of the answers:

http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/2007/08/judges-ruling-exposes-ex-gay-doubletalk-about-thought-crimes/#comments

Regan said,
And they don’t get NEARLY so worked up as on gay related issues.Not on domestic violence, not on adultery, not on murder, gang incursion into every American city…no other subject seems to get them started than homosexuality.

Regan, I believe a big part of that reason is personal prejudice and disdain for homosexuality that isn’t always necessarily based on Scripture. A personal dislike if you will because there are some individuals that have no profession of faith but have a strong prejudice against homosexuality. Divorce, adultery, murder can be seen for some as a one time act while homosexuality is seen as a continuous lifestyle choice. I’ve met a few Christians that believe that homosexuality is worse than murder. They base this belief on what I said above. One time act vs. a continuous lifestyle choice. Ken R - exgaywatch.

It is nearly an end game for ex-gay ministries in throughout the world. At the turn of the century, homosexuality is now confirmed as inborn, and not socially constructed. And at the turned of the decade, the insistence of churches that homosexuality can be 'cured' or 'erased' had turned into the acceptance of homosexuality as unchangable, but the need to be celibate is required for people of this orientation.

The definition of the 'homosexual lifestyle' is still one of the most bothersome questions Christians can ever answer. The word 'lifestyle' itself is as vague as homosexual 'behaviour'. What constitutes the 'sinful lifestyle'? Going to a mall? How is it any different than a heterosexual lifestyle? Example, images of provocative artistes such as Shakira and Beyonce are on display almost every single day. Their adulteress like 'behaviour' on MTV, barely clothed and hip shaking shows are watched by millions all across the world. So how can we support that and say that it is okay, but the expression of two men in love considered a higher level of sin?

The numbers of HIV/AIDS infections are rising, but the fact remains that heterosexuals represent the highest numbers of cases of infections in Malaysia. Once touted as a homosexual disease, even young children are not spared. The ignorance in depiction of homosexuals as its carriers is going to sow seeds of consequence. Heterosexuals would be having sex without protection, assuming they would be free from it. The discrimination of homosexuals, even transgenders by this manner is complete misguided. HIV/AIDS does not discriminate.

I can give more examples, but seriously, it is time we really think about what is going on and reconcile the reality of the world we live in with the faith we profess. If not, we might as well continue to be stuck in a third world mentality, where the sun still travels around the flat earth. We should justify the good things of this earth and see the positives of people, and not giving excuses to impose our bigoted thinking on what we feel uncomfortable with, while enjoying another sexy video by Mariah Carey, and learning from Akon on how to 'smack that'.


Update: 11/8/2007

A scathing response was produced, let us examine the mind of a Christian fundie, and allow me to comment along the way:

http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/08/10/gay-pastor-wants-to-start-church-in-kl/

Hey, here’s a notion: Let’s go learn about holiness, crucifying he self, and obedience to God from a person who is blatantly defying God’s laws by being homosexual.

Being homosexual is not defying God's law. Sadly, as it is well known ever since 1949, bias crept into the Bible through translators.

Next, we can attend services focusing on honesty by a convicted white-collar criminal.

It is amazing how a person could not separate criminal activity, with love between two men.

And then leave our children at Sunday School run by Michael Jackson who claims to have been born again, hallelujah!

Probably the sign of how shallow some people view others. Michael Jackson was harrassed and milked millions of dollars, by mothers who ask their children to say they are molested by him. The case was closed after they find conflicting testimonies.

It is my opinion, and the opinion of the VAST majority of mainstream REAL
churches, that homosexuality and pastoring do not mix.

The VAST majority of mainstream REAL church are known as Christian liberals. And most of them already have already drummed to dead the misinformation concerning homosexuality in the Bible by Christian fundamentalists. Probably a few radicals like people who are homophobic, still wish to linger on.

Let me be clear that I am all for acceptance of people who lead homosexual
lifestyles. However, the homosexual lifestyle itself should be renounced and left behind.

Again I stress again, what constitutes the homosexual 'lifestyle'? I know a good couple, who go watch movies and hang out in the mall and so forth. Heck, they do not even like pubs as much as heterosexuals do. Anyway, they are two men in love, so what is the 'lifestyle'?

The correct way of dealing with this is to accept homosexual persons, but to
show them God’s love for them and how God does not want them to live life short
of what He intends for them. Visit this link to ex-gay EdmundSmith of Real Love Ministry for how homosexuals can be accepted without condoning sinful homosexuality.

The correct way of dealing with homosexuals is to stop the prejudice and stigmatization against them, not submitting them to a orientation confused man who runs a huge sexual orientation and identity misinformation campaign. And stop the meaningless talk of how homosexuality is so sinful, when heterosexuality is equally that sinful. It is not the orientation. It is the person. God judges the matters of the heart, remember?

If that doesn’t make you stop feeling homosexul inside, then supress it. I was an angry and horny young man, and I survived 25 years without beating people up or having illicit sex. Tht’s what self-denial is all about, you can’t break a habit by accepting and feeding it.

Still being an angry and horny young man, but surpressing his heterosexuality. Probably would agree with him here, unless he wants to show an example but never having sex at all with anyone, and never getting married.

The bottom line: You can be gay, but you can’t be Christian and
gay.

I do not think any person would agree to that. The third world mentality of some young men is really getting stale. So I can be born left handed and I cannot be a Christian? I am born with a third hand, so I am left out of His kingdom? So God made homosexuals to be condemned later? Not one homosexual Christian questions God, but heterosexual people still do. This shows homosexuals appreciate God by accepting themselves, more so than heterosexuals. I did not say that, but the statements above proves that.

Or go ahead and remain gay. Open a new religious-congregation building -
just don’t call it a church.

When two or three homosexuals or heterosexuals gather in the name of the Lord, it is therefore called a church. Something must be wrong when Christians still think the church is a building. Probably to much anguish caused by attending talks by a confused misinformative ministry.

Lead the worshippers in prayer - just don’t call yourself a pastor.

God chooses pastors for the church. Some people just loves playing God.

And teach your version of religion - just don’t call it Christian.

Christians are overrated. I will settle with believer in Christ. I am utterly astonished at how some fundamentalist people still fail to remember Christian fundamentals such as John 3:16.

By professing to the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus for our sins yet
continuing to live in wilful sin, you seriously grieve the Holy Spirit. (See
the bottom of this post on homosexuality and the Bible for Biblical mentions
against homosexuality.)

The Bible according to some fellow who is hogwashed by another fellow who was hogwashed... Or we could just read the Bible as just the Bible, without questions, without interpretations and without prejudice; not picking up lines and make them justifications to stampede on a minority group just because we feel uncomfortable with them. Now, THAT would grief the Holy Spirit.

My spirit rejoices with Reverand Ou's spirit, as he trully opens a sanctuary for the often misunderstood community. People like us. God Speed. Our Saviour blesses the pure in heart and the humble, against the oppression of the hypocrates and the proud.

Matthew 7: 1-2
"1Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."


Another update 11/8/2007

Information about the Sunday worship (after you negotiate through more devilish show of Christian 'luv'), is here:

http://www.church.com.my/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1663

On Aug 11 is Q & A time for people who are persecuted as gays and lesbians.
On Aug 12 is Sunday Worship.
Venue: Grand Olympic Hotel, KL.
Co-ordinator: Joseph, 012-2087 949.

You can have more comedy here too, this weird sounding article is by another Rev called Allen Tan (http://www.churchinperth.com/site/adetails.asp?ArticleID=1182). This statement tops the list of one liners:

The consequence is: more people are getting HIV, and souls won by them
would head for hell!

If we are really going to hell, I guess we would be seeing Rev Allen Tan there too. Ditto.

A new sexual orientative agenda... Be prepared....

There is a new agenda on the rise:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=314&objectid=10455823

... asexuals have had a low public profile and a real sense of isolation. Now they are banding together in a bid for recognition, understanding and acceptance....

Oh No. This new movement is becoming very active. Be warned.

Salisbury tells of one man she worked with who claimed to be asexual; it turned out that he'd been horrifically sexually abused and was making a very valid choice for himself to not engage in that aspect of life.

It is a sign. Trigger issues. When no passions are confused. This is the very threat to the constitution of marriage and family. There is no such thing as asexual. God says there is only heterosexual. God says we must all multiply and conquer the earth.

I know. We got to call those transformational ministries. Exodus International. Focus On The Family. Real Love Ministry. NARTH even. We really have to bust these unwanted feelings of no attraction. Show them your spouse. Show them your children. Show them the joys of being straight.

Preach to them that change is possible. Tell them it is a human right to have sex.

Do something!

Such rationales can frustrate asexuals, especially those who don't see themselves as fitting that model. As Kate says:

"I'd never been abused or all those sorts of reasons that people often roll out as possible reasons why you might be so called asexual.

I didn't feel I had a dysfunction or an illness."

They can still experience heterosexuality! They still have a choice to come out of asexuality!

Right, Eddie?

Alan?

James?

Randy?

Pete?

Joe?



Hello?!

Transsexuals Are A Culture?

This article was brought to my attention a few months ago by my friend Mr. Raymond Tai from the PT Foundation. Many thanks to him.

Transsexuals in Malaysia: No discrimination but not encouraged either
13 December 2006

Malaysia — Transsexuals in the country are not being discriminated but the 'culture' is not encouraged, either. This is the sentiment of two non-governmental organisations (NGOs) following a foreign report that transsexuals in Malaysia are gaining acceptance within the local community. In the report by Associated Press yesterday, Jessie Chung, the Malaysian transsexual who made national headlines when she married an accountant in a public wedding last year, claimed that anti-discrimination campaigns by local NGOs have helped changed the public's perception on transsexuals. National Council of Women's Organisation deputy president Faridah Khalid, said though NGOs do not encourage transsexuals, they don't discriminate them either. "Our anti-discrimination campaigns don't focus on transsexuals but communities which are prone to sexually-transmitted diseases like HIV and AIDS. This includes gays, lesbians, sex-workers and drug addicts. "We do not want these groups to go underground because that would lead to a lot of other social problems. By identifying who they are, we are able to approach them and address their issues,she told The Malay Mail. Faridah said when the Government can't address a particular issue, especially something as sensitive as this, that's when NGOs come in. Muslim Consumers Association of Malaysia project director Noor Nirwandy Mat Noordin felt that the statement by Chung may not be properly measured. "I wouldn't say they are gaining acceptance in society because there are many others who feel otherwise, like the elderly who value tradition and culture. "The culture may pose a threat to the younger generation as they are more exposed to modern technology,he said. Nirwandy said transsexuals, gays and lesbians may not be aware of it but their conduct in public may cause discomfort or unease among the local community. "Though many do not accept it, we still tolerate it because it is their right. He said the Government should conduct proper research on such cultures to ensure that future generations are not affected. In the report, Chung, who was born a male and had a sex-change surgery in 2003, had claimed that Malaysian transsexuals are "luckier than those in some other places. She had said: "I know this because when I walk down the streets, strangers who recognise me often approach me with encouraging words. Our society is becoming more open-minded. Chung, a Christian in her 30s, married accountant Joshua Beh in front of 800 guests in a ceremony conducted by independent church pastors on Nov 12, 2005. However, the Government ruled the marriage invalid as it considered it a same-sex union. Chung's identification documents state that she is a man, since local transsexuals cannot legally update their gender status even after changing sex Citation Anon (2006). Transsexuals in Malaysia: No discrimination but not encouraged either. Malay Mail Online http://www.mtra.org.au/press/06/1213.html

Yuki's thoughts: I am absolutely astonished by this display of third world mentality.