Singapore Local Gay News [LGBT Related News] (Compiled)

[Guest Erotictales]

The question remains if a person has public sex, why can't he be prosecuted by a public nuisance act alone. Why must there be an additional charge; or a specific charge.

If you're saying a gay or straight person will be prosecuted as long as they have public intercourse, then why the difference in away legal proceedings.

A law like 377A specifically creates shame and misconception, not only on the prosecuted, but to the rest of us. This sharply contradicts what the PM, alone, said that gay Singaporeans are also recognized and respected.

[Guest Guest]

We're sure it happened -- however, we have never heard about "a girl and a guy" being caught having sex or hanky panky in the public toilet etc. Does it mean our society is more tolerant if the act is performed by a "normal" couple??

[Oswald]

Entrapment?

[Guest CityLink]

Entrapment?

This is my guess too. Just be very careful, guys -- since the sauna's are accessible and affordable nowadays.

[Guest Once a chemsex dudu]

The thing is, he's rich. Reasonably good looking. Educated. Why get involved with chem?

Especially since he's championing such a contentious issue. Obviously, he hasn't come to terms with some things.

Why get involved with chem? If u haven't tried chemsex u never know how good it feel. Those doing ice now are addicted. I used to chemsex almost every weekend. The nation party that was organised by Fridae?, i went there 3 times....lots of tourist and goodlking guys...many including myself were high on something.

After seeing some of my chemsex kaki got caught...supplier got caught...I told myself if I carry on....it will be my time getting caught...worst still infected wif hiv cos a lot of tops on chem wan to fxxk raw. I stopped 5 yrs ago...and it was a tough one. I changed my hp number so chemsex kaki can't contact me. I disappear from the scene.... ppl probably thought i was dead. Even now when I think of those 3 yrs of hot steamy sex high wif chem I kind of miss them but news like this of SK being caught affirm my decision to quit. Sex & drugs feels damn good but they really shouldn't be mixed.

[evianguy]

If you want to do drugs, please do not front any gay rights (377A movement) or HIV awareness, you do gays and HIV+ ppl a disservice. You are giving those who would not accept us another weapon to use against our acceptance.

Now the biggots will have another example to associate gays and HIV+ with drug users.

Edited September 11, 2010 by evianguy

[Guest Guest]

Once it is reported in news, 99 percent guilty. Caught in his house at 12 midnite plus...etc most likely got tip off by someone otherwise must be having some "gathering". Some people are so rich that they get too bored in life so seek thrill just like US movie stars or singers..etc You seldom see poor people taking drugs but mostly help to peddle.

haha poor ppl peddle drugs for rich ppl who can afford.

anyway someone said he is reasonably goodlooking? actually only his bod la

[Guest Direct name]

That's why cant get it clean, as in society Gay man = not clean even some still beleive stereotype AIDS started from homosex acts (This cant be denied, some still think that)

And U got Penal Code ... lucky he was just charged of drug, not related with Penal Code

Wow Many directly mentioned name "SK" will it be judgment by public before trial happened here

(Considering his reputation in this forum is bad)

Directly mention Stuart Koe?

Hello. his name is in the papers wad. not direct enough ?

[Guest Protein]

If you want to do drugs, please do not front any gay rights (377A movement) or HIV awareness, you do gays and HIV+ ppl a disservice. You are giving those who would not accept us another weapon to use against our acceptance.

Now the biggots will have another example to associate gays and HIV+ with drug users.

Well said! When you put yourself forward as a leader or role model for a community, you should behave with integrity.

[steelwings]

This circle is really a BITCH in capital B.

People made mistake, we all do. Say something nice. Comments are fine but be constructive and not destructive, especially those overly personal comments reserve that for your girly gossip sessions over coffee within your own bitchy groups.

[Guest sighhhhh]

agree with steelwings.

useless to have pinkdot.sg event and etc cuz we all not united to help each other but we racing to bitch around,kill and stabbing our own community.

we no angels,we are not perfect...everyone make mistakes.....even thou S.K is ceo and founder of fridae,he also just normal human being like us too...

just hope this is a wake up call for him and change for the better...pls guys,stupid bitching and get a life...there better things to do in ur daily life...

[Guest -Guest_]

We're sure it happened -- however, we have never heard about "a girl and a guy" being caught having sex or hanky panky in the public toilet etc. Does it mean our society is more tolerant if the act is performed by a "normal" couple??

Well, you're right, straights don't get caught in the toilet. They get caught everywhere! The latest was the youngsters on STOMP enjoying themselves in the carpark somewhere North of Singapore. (Can't remember where though)

Our society is not tolerant if such things occur in public. And honestly, I don't think anyone of us should tolerate these things happening in public

[Guest Erotictales]

I think it's also hypocrisy and the fact many more people are str8.

A typical guy between 14 to 40, encounters str8 couple making out in a toilet. What do you think he would do. WAH GO SEE AH! TAKE HP VIDEO!

See gay sucking, WAH SO DISGUSTING! CALL MATA.

[biscuits]

Is there anything that we can do constructively apart from just talking bout it here. I feel so helpless.

[toshi_elton]

Well, look at it this way: Who doesn't have any mistakes or misgivings? It would be quite weird not to sin at all. It might even be right to say that some of the most 'Politically Correct' persons have mistakes.

Why penalize such acts for they do not represent us PLUs/AJs/Gays but they represent themselves? Sadly, not many can see it that way also. To look at it, 911 also caused many Muslim friends in America to suffer. Strange isn't it?

[Guest Guest]

Strange isn't it?

It's not strange! It happens everyday if you have eyes to see and ear to hear. It'll be strange if it doesn't happen.

[Guest guest]

Habis Leow , That guy has a degree in pharmacy from the u.s. , he is doctorate holder , and many years back he was featured in the newspaper as an up and coming ( cumming) entrepreneur who is able to tap into the pink market , earning pink dollars in a legitimate way.

there were all gay cruises to no where, once a year gay parties on the eve of National day of little red dot that sort of rub the authorities in all the wrong buttons.

He was an Aids prevention spokes person at one stage and also very out abd loud .

Now he is finished, no even the U.S. will accept him now if he ever applies for a residency, habis utterly habis.

This is what happens when one is too flushed with cash and associate with whites , you have a sense of invinsibilty but it all goes down the drain

I think it pretty obvious he was set up good and proper by the authorities.

[Guest beggar]

I think it pretty obvious he was set up good and proper by the authorities.

[Guest Double]

It is interesting that there was no report on Fridae.com on this incident. Usually, they will be the first to report any GLBT issues in the region

[Guest Ironrod]

It is disheartening enough to know that SK is caught.

Worse for us to speculate and associate drugs with his line of work.

Please reserve your remarks, lah.

Wait wait! Ahaha u made us confuse Stuart Koe with SKman in the forum.

I thought SKman is SK lol

[Guest guest]

Looking at the other angle, being a prominent figure in th GLBT, he did project a bad image for the gay people. So whatever good things he had said about gay in singapore, will more or less washed down the drain. Now people will associate gay with drugs..again.

First was alex (the guy behind manhunt) then was caught molesting a participant..etc now this...wow.. Let's hope it stops here. Otherwise, the garment again got bad things to say about gay liao.. First HIVs, now drugs..

[Guest Ironrod]

Looking at the other angle, being a prominent figure in th GLBT, he did project a bad image for the gay people. So whatever good things he had said about gay in singapore, will more or less washed down the drain. Now people will associate gay with drugs..again.

First was alex (the guy behind manhunt) then was caught molesting a participant..etc now this...wow.. Let's hope it stops here. Otherwise, the garment again got bad things to say about gay liao.. First HIVs, now drugs..

Seriously sometimes I don't know what EDUCATION is for.

If Singaporean focus so much about EDUCATION, they better be able to read up about TRUTH.

The main problem is most people are ignorance and CHOOSE to be.

So since we can't control what other think, we should be bothered too much about it too.

Anyways there are rape cases/drug cases everyday too so what if a GAY committed them? GAY is nothing special except for our sexual preferences.

So don't let anybody else put you down just because of 1 or 2 bad egg

[Guest Ironrod]

Ops I mean "Should not"

Edited September 13, 2010 by Ironrod

[Guest Guest]

Looking at the other angle, being a prominent figure in th GLBT, he did project a bad image for the gay people. So whatever good things he had said about gay in singapore, will more or less washed down the drain. Now people will associate gay with drugs..again.

First was alex (the guy behind manhunt) then was caught molesting a participant..etc now this...wow.. Let's hope it stops here. Otherwise, the garment again got bad things to say about gay liao.. First HIVs, now drugs..

What is garment? How cum gay talk like this one?

[Guest comments]

This circle is really a BITCH in capital B.

People made mistake, we all do. Say something nice. Comments are fine but be constructive and not destructive, especially those overly personal comments reserve that for your girly gossip sessions over coffee within your own bitchy groups.

Since the above comments promotes the virtue of accepting others making mistakes and others imperfections, then the above commentator should also accept others for making the mistakes of bitching. People make mistakes, including the mistake of bitching. So steelwings should accept that just as he expects others to accept Stuart's mistakes.

And since steelwings believes in saying things nice, then he should also walk the talk, act what he preaches. He should not be using sentences such as "overly personal comments reserve that for your girly gossip sessions over coffee within your own bitchy groups". This runs contrary to his exhortation "Say something nice."

Otherwise he is not doing what he preaches.

[Guest rabrook face.]

Since the above comments promotes the virtue of accepting others making mistakes and others imperfections, then the above commentator should also accept others for making the mistakes of bitching. People make mistakes, including the mistake of bitching. So steelwings should accept that just as he expects others to accept Stuart's mistakes.

And since steelwings believes in saying things nice, then he should also walk the talk, act what he preaches. He should not be using sentences such as "overly personal comments reserve that for your girly gossip sessions over coffee within your own bitchy groups". This runs contrary to his exhortation "Say something nice."

Otherwise he is not doing what he preaches.

LOL...

[Guest guest]

Since the above comments promotes the virtue of accepting others making mistakes and others imperfections, then the above commentator should also accept others for making the mistakes of bitching. People make mistakes, including the mistake of bitching. So steelwings should accept that just as he expects others to accept Stuart's mistakes.

And since steelwings believes in saying things nice, then he should also walk the talk, act what he preaches. He should not be using sentences such as "overly personal comments reserve that for your girly gossip sessions over coffee within your own bitchy groups". This runs contrary to his exhortation "Say something nice."

Otherwise he is not doing what he preaches.

I support you. If someone is not nice, why do we still try to say good things about him right? Then we becomes a hypocrite? I still believe in straight forward and speak your mind. Steelwings, your msg is also quite bitchy..so let's not the pot calling the kettle black. sama sama la.

[Guest Neutral]

I dont think Steelwings is bitching here. He is making a true observation about how we gays behave here, who are constantly bitching for no reason.

Lets face the fact, he is speaking the truth, and most people can't see it as a fact, most cant accept it as a fact. Its happening , everyday, be in the chatroom, the forum the saunas or in a club.

Most gays tend to judge and see things with their emotions rather than calming down and see things as it is or a bigger picture beyond what is.

I am here not because I am praising SK, nor am I here because I support the use of drugs. Definitely not.

SK is a very prominent figure in th gay world. And lets face it, he created Fridae for us gays to hook up. He organized events that you people are willing to pay for, so you could be seen in such events, otherwise why should you?

Remember, nobody forced you to have a Fridae profile or pay for his events. You chose to.

Without his initiation, where could you guys out there, hook up?

At least be grateful for what he has contributed to the gay circle while we put aside what he does with his private life with those chemicals.

At least he was brave enough to voice his opinons to the authories publicly, while many just hide behind a screen and type senseless bitchy remarks.

I knew SK since the Double One days, the Nation Party days. and the Towel Club Days

I am not singing his praises , that he allowed me to "cut queue" during the clubbing days, not because of him inviting me to his events free under guest list.

I have done some projects with him.

To me , SK is a very complex chararcter. I would say he is someone very intelligent person, very focus in what he wants, a vey shrewd business man who knows what is going on, one who actually has visions. He could have gone much further, BUT, it was those stuff he takes that impeded his much further potential growth.

On side he projects as a loud spokesman who knows how to market his stuff, but there is a another side he doesn't show or doesn't he talks loquaciosly to you about his dreams his philosophies his hidden ideas and fears, unless he trust and feel very comfortable with you completely.

I have see the books he reads and he shows his compassion to stray animals.

Most people will find him cold and arrogant.

There are loveable sides of him you will never have the chance to see, but yet you like to talk so much.

I myself is not into those stuff, but if he decides to and knows his limits and his works well (since he is a trained pharmacist)I do not have the right to judge him, since my lifestyle may not be agreeable to his.

To each his own. Yet we are answerable to our own actions and thoughts one day.

What I see is that, for someone who is very intelligent, he gets bored with mundane stuff every easily (I know that for sure)

Thus I do think, he took those stuff out of boredom. He is one person who has no personal emotional issues.

You will realized that usually the very intelligent people, are usually the ones who are seems to be social misfits and are judged constantly by others, who still think within the constraints of social conventions and conditioning.

And sadly, they don't realize it.

[Guest Guest]

1) making mistake is one thing: i will forgive as no one never makes mistake before.

2) standing up for gays, fighting for gay rights and yet do things that put gays in a bad light: i make no apologies and i will not forgive such people

you can do a thousand good deeds, no one will see. but one small error, everyone will take notice. if the report is true, and he being such a prominent figure in gay society, he should be brave enough to face the public, apologise and offer to step down from all gay organisations that help to fight for gay rights.

[HendryTan]

A long post ( http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2010/09/13/law-and-order-questions-a-mile-high/ ) which I took from AlexAu's YawningBread. He builds his argument via discussion of other cases and went on to discussed about the unfairness of charging the above man under Section 377a which mandates a jail sentence.

http://yawningbread.wordpress.com/2010/09/13/law-and-order-questions-a-mile-high/

Law and order questions a mile high

Published 13 September 2010

Singapore Airlines advertises that couples can book a double bed on its A380 first-class suites. While you can’t quite see it in this video, the airline, in this news release dated March 2008, clearly says “For couples traveling, the beds in the middle two seats can be converted to an optional double bed.”

This other video shows you how the conversion is done:

However, in a UK Sunday Times story (28 Oct 2007) headlined “Sex ban on the Airbus A380“, the airline’s policy, ever so reflective of the Singapore government’s, was spelt out:

The A380 may have the world’s first airborne double bed, but it won’t be put to the obvious use if Singapore Airlines has its way: “If couples used our double beds to engage in inappropriate activity, we would politely ask them to desist,” said the company’s Stephen Forshaw.

“There are things that are acceptable on an aircraft and things that aren’t, and the rules for behaviour in our double beds are the same ones that apply throughout the aircraft.”

[snip]

Even so, [Tony and Julie Elwood from Perth, Australia] weren’t too impressed with Singapore’s strait-laced attitude. “So they’ll sell you a double bed, and give you privacy and endless champagne — and then say you can’t do what comes naturally?” asked Tony, a vigorous 76. “Seems a bit strange.”

What the airline fails to tell its passengers (and thereby exposes itself to a nasty lawsuit one day) is that it is illegal to do what comes naturally, and passengers can be arrested and jailed.

This is because Singapore law operates on board any ship or aircraft that is registered in Singapore. Under our law, sex in a public place, even nudity visible to the public, is an offence.

But what do we mean by a public place? If the passengers closed the doors of their first-class suites, is it not private? If two economy-class passengers decided to join the “mile-high club” by shagging inside an aircraft toilet, would that space not be private?

In law, the answer is No. While in real life, we tend to see public/private more as a continuum of different degrees, the law makes an either/or determination. The Miscellaneous Offences (Public Order and Nuisance) Act defines it thus:

“public place” means any place or premises to which at the material time the public or any section of the public has access, on payment or otherwise, as of right or by virtue of express or implied permission;

Any space to which the public has access, whether freely or on payment of a fee, is considered a public place. A locked hotel bedroom is a public space, for example, because any member of the public, upon promise to pay, can get to use it. By the same definition, sex in a Singapore Airlines suite (or toilet) is illegal because you’re doing it in a “public place”.

Yet even if that’s what the law says, what would members of the public consider a reasonable and appropriate response? Would hauling people to court for that be akin to taking a sledgehammer to deal with a fly? I think most of us would say Yes: It would be totally disproportionate. Interruption and social pressure should be sufficient if we disapproved. Some of us might not even disapprove; they might say it’s none of others’ business.

Public opinion shifts somewhat when the participants of sex or nudity do not even take the trouble to shield their acts behind closed doors. They thrust it before people who may find it offensive. In such a situation, a larger number of people will say prosecution is justified.

And that’s what happened after Eng Kai Er and Jan Philip took a stroll in the buff through Holland Village on 24 January 2009, though interestingly, “There was no reaction of disgust. The people reacted with cheers as was reported in the newspapers,” their defence counsel William Chan told the court. (Today, 2 May 2009, Nude stroll in Holland Village for for the ‘thrill’)

On 30 April 2009, they pleaded guilty to charges under Section 27A of the Miscellaneous Offence (Public Order and Nuisance) Act, which says:

Appearing nude in public or private place

27A. —(1) Any person who appears nude —

(a) in a public place; or

(b) in a private place and is exposed to public view,

shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months or to both.

The judge fined each of them $2,000 — the maximum under the act, but did not impose imprisonment.

* * * * *

But sex in a “public place” is different from being nude walking down a street, you might say. Is there a law against the former? As far as I can see, there isn’t any specific law to that. There is however one that can be used for such situations — Section 20 of the same Act:

Riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour in, or in the immediate vicinity of, certain places

20. Any person who is found guilty of any riotous, disorderly or indecent behaviour in any public road or in any public place or place of public amusement or resort, or in the immediate vicinity of, or in, any court, public office, police station or place of worship, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $1,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month and, in the case of a second or subsequent conviction, to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months.

(underscoring added by Yawning Bread)

It is on this basis that I said above that making full use of Singapore Airlines’ double bed is illegal.

You will also note however that having full-blown sex in a “public place” makes you liable to a maximum fine of $1,000 or maximum imprisonment of one month (if first offence), while non-sexual nudity attracts a maximum fine twice that and up to 3 months’ jail. Of course, most people will find it hard to have full-blown sex in public view without exposing critical parts of one’s anatomy, thus making oneself liable to both charges.

So perhaps it is correct that sex or indecent behaviour in a technically “public place”, but not within view of the public is considered a lesser offence. Moreover, no effort is made to root it out, so romantic liaisons continue to take place in parked cars or deserted stairwells, or in first-class cabins, the view being that if the couple has taken some trouble to shield themselves from the public, then the enforcement authorities should leave them alone.

* * * * *

With one big exception.

When two men have a sexual encounter behind locked toilet doors, the authorities do not leave them alone. Not only are they arrested, they face penalties many times more severe than the nude couple who walked through Holland Village.

On Monday, 6 September 2010, one man had such a case mentioned in court. On Thursday, 9 September 2010, came another:

9 September 2010

Agence France-Presse

Gay Singaporean charged over sex act in public toilet

A Singaporean gay man was charged Thursday with having oral sex in a public toilet, in breach of the city-state’s ban on sexual acts between men.

Tan Eng Hong, 47, is alleged to have committed the offence in March inside the toilet cubicle of a popular shopping mall in the Singapore’s business and shopping district.

Homosexuality is not illegal in Singapore, but sex between men is criminalised under the penal code, despite amendments in 2007 which legalised oral and anal sex for heterosexual couples.

The code encompasses “any act of gross indecency” and carries a sentence of up to two years in jail, according to the attorney general’s website.

Recent data on the number of people convicted under the code was not immediately available, but figures given by Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng in a parliamentary reply in 2007 showed 185 people were convicted between 1997-2006.

Tan was released on a bail of 8,000 Singapore dollars (5,960 US dollars) after his case was adjourned to September 27.

What the report above does not specify is that Tan was charged under Section 377A, which mandates imprisonment. The judge has no option to impose only a fine. The prison sentence can extend up to two years.

This is exactly the kind of thing that points to anti-gay discrimination. For the same offence, gay men are treated much more harshly than heterosexual couples. For heterosexuals, the authorities turn a blind eye to sex behind closed doors, even in technically “public” places; we never hear of arrests and court appearances. Even when they walk stark naked down a street lined with restaurants, they are just fined, not imprisoned.

Gay men who have sex behind a locked toilet door, however, are charged under a law that only targets them and that mandates imprisonment. Is this fair? Is this equality?

And this is the same law that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in 2007 would not be “proatively” enforced.

[Guest guest]

Stuart Koe has a Pharmacy degree from University of Minnesota. It's a basic degree not a doctorate/PhD which Minnesota also offers. His degree is no different from the Pharmacy degree in NUS, except they call it a Pharmacy D. there and a B.Sc. here. He graduated in 1995 and he's 38 this year which means he obtained his degree at 23. Not a Ph.D for sure. Certainly not over-educated.

[Guest hypocritical]

Someone telling people to "Say something nice" while he says nasty things about others = hypocrite

[Guest constructive suggestion]

you can do a thousand good deeds, no one will see. but one small error, everyone will take notice. if the report is true, and he being such a prominent figure in gay society, he should be brave enough to face the public, apologise and offer to step down from all gay organisations that help to fight for gay rights.

The above is a constructive suggestion. It is good PR to do the above - to mitigate (i.e. reduce) the damage Stuart done to the gay community (even though it was not his intention to cause that damage).

[Guest Appalled]

OMG! I cant believe there are people actually giving Stuart Koe sympathy!? Do any of u guys believe that he has only been doing drugs lately? i bet he has been doing drugs for a years. For someone who is involved in a lot of HIV prevention, Stuart Koe is a bigot. Dont really care what kind of person Stuart Koe is, he deserves no pity. And being a prominent figure in the community, he has given the people outside of the gay community more ammunition to further stereotyping and gay-bashing.

Drugs are bad and make the whole HIV situations worse among other stuff. End of story.

[Guest Guest]

Someone telling people to "Say something nice" while he says nasty things about others = hypocrite

who is the hypocrite? i certainly don't see anyone who is not consistent in what he has said.

[Guest hypocritical]

who is the hypocrite? i certainly don't see anyone who is not consistent in what he has said.

You can read through some previous posts to find a particular post where someone tells others to say something nice (he was not happy that some people are not saying nice things about Stuart), while he himself says things that are not nice about others.

[Guest hypocritical]

who is the hypocrite? i certainly don't see anyone who is not consistent in what he has said.

You can look at the post made by "steelwings" on 11 September 2010 at 11:25 PM.

[steelwings]

I will decide when I should say what I want to say and how I will say it. At least I am posting with a profile, rather than some random comments from some ball-less mother farker

Yes, I m a hypocrite. The bad guy. So? I never proclaim to be the mr nice guy, if you enjoy tailing me around leaving comments after my postings, pickin up my shits, be my guest

Edited September 12, 2021 by steelwings

[Guest dan]

ridiculous trains of thought in this forum.

there is no $!^*( correlation between drugs and homosexuality, sex and homosexuality, sex and drugs and any of those combinations.

what stuart koe does in his professional career and with his charitable work has nothing to do with his personal life.

and what the fxxk was that comment bashing the use of the word 'garment'? farflung silly nitpicking linguistically challenged ignorant to the bigger picture that projects itself with equally farflung silly comments. you should shut up because you sound like a fool orbiting pluto.

and some idiot said that SK should step down. what, was he in an elected position to begin with? what he has done is really in all sense his own business and out of what he feels compelled to do. fighting for the cause of HIV and his personal drug-usage are two separate issues that only ignorant fools and those so fixed on superficiality will muddle up.

get your heads out of your arses and start thinking critically before you speak. some of you sound like wounded faggots trying to fit into and please a silly straight society thinking the only way to do it is to present some ridiculous image of virginmaryism. Thats not going to happen. Society at large is a filthy lot. The Church has proven itself another filthy lot. Any groups majority or minority will always be filthy. and you, bum-licking cock-sucking piss-loving leather bound homo, you think you're virginmary?

time to get real. your fixation on superficiality needs to get some grounding. and until you do, your comments will be nothing but flotsam in a cesspool.

[Guest Guest]

ridiculous trains of thought in this forum.

----- verbal diahorrea -------

time to get real. your fixation on superficiality needs to get some grounding. and until you do, your comments will be nothing but flotsam in a cesspool.

Looks like the the least liked person with the most negative points in the history of bw is back.

[doncoin]

Here is the thing: We are know drugs are bad. Based on the report Stuart Koe was found to be in possession of "drugs".

My take on it is that if he is doing it in the privacy of his own apartment, and not harming others by distributing it etc. let him be. Public figure or not, gay advocate or not, he is human. He has every right to do what he wants in the privacy of his own house.

At the end of it, the only person that is doing harm to himself is Stuart.

[retri]

Most people here are quick to condemn, and even quicker to not acknowledge the good things that Stuart has done for the GLBT community. If gay people are so easily divided by what the media presented, then may I add that, those who are quick to condemn, do not deserve what Stuart is trying to achieve.

It's obviously a tip-off / entrapment. And why do they want to clamp down on him? Have you hatemongers even thought / processed about it before making judgments? Judging is fine, if you so enjoy making a fool out of yourself when you are only given segment of the information provided by the media. And suddenly, so many of you people state what ought to be, and what ought not to be, what's right, and what's wrong. Stuart probably has done more good for the community here than anyone of you have done, or will ever do.

What imbecilistic behaviors. Little wonder that the gay community is an apathetic bunch, with you people around. Disgusting.

[retri]

ridiculous trains of thought in this forum.

there is no $!^*( correlation between drugs and homosexuality, sex and homosexuality, sex and drugs and any of those combinations.

what stuart koe does in his professional career and with his charitable work has nothing to do with his personal life.

and what the fxxk was that comment bashing the use of the word 'garment'? farflung silly nitpicking linguistically challenged ignorant to the bigger picture that projects itself with equally farflung silly comments. you should shut up because you sound like a fool orbiting pluto.

and some idiot said that SK should step down. what, was he in an elected position to begin with? what he has done is really in all sense his own business and out of what he feels compelled to do. fighting for the cause of HIV and his personal drug-usage are two separate issues that only ignorant fools and those so fixed on superficiality will muddle up.

get your heads out of your arses and start thinking critically before you speak. some of you sound like wounded faggots trying to fit into and please a silly straight society thinking the only way to do it is to present some ridiculous image of virginmaryism. Thats not going to happen. Society at large is a filthy lot. The Church has proven itself another filthy lot. Any groups majority or minority will always be filthy. and you, bum-licking cock-sucking piss-loving leather bound homo, you think you're virginmary?

time to get real. your fixation on superficiality needs to get some grounding. and until you do, your comments will be nothing but flotsam in a cesspool.

I'm with you.

[fugues]

As this matter is before the courts, we should be careful what we say here. This is a public forum. We should not say things such as so and so has been taking drugs, doing it for years etc. These remarks are incriminating. I think our community has to be thankful to Stuart for all the good things he has done for us. He has given us a platform in his portal, a place for us to play in his events and a voice in the rights that he has been trying to fight for us. Now that he is going through a difficult period, we should offer him our prayers and our support. I do not know if there is any truth in the allegations but let him who has not sinned cast the first stone.

Stuart - be strong, for every negative voice raised against you, there are many others who are for you.

Edited September 13, 2010 by fugues

[Guest -poster-]

Those that are giving Stuart support don't know that he does have it coming to him for dealing with drugs. For those in the know, it was only a matter of time before he got caught. Many activists are also not likely to support him given the negative image of drugs.

That said, it is sad that it has to come down to this for him. All he can hope for is a lenient sentence and that the prosecution isn't going for more than just possession.

This isn't a good thing for the gay community whatever the outcome.

[Guest what other gays said]

What other gays said about Stuart Koe & Drug-abuse online:

Well he is lucky he wasn't caught with any more drugs given how strict Singapore's draconian laws are on illegal drugs - he could've gotten the death sentence if he was caught with a big enough quantity!

Frankly, I feel no sympathy for him. A man his age ought to know better.

You're right. A man his age ought to know better.

And given the bureaucracy and procedures, to actually get searched, means it's not as simple as a tipoff. He was probably on narcotic's radar for a while.

I don't understand gay men who take drugs when they go clubbing - basically, if the club you're at is so boring that you have to resort to chemical stimulation, then you should ask yourself why you're going there and resorting to the drugs. Perhaps you might be happier doing something else with a different group of friends - like having dinner together, doing sports or going to a theme park to ride roller coasters.

And as for gay men who take drugs during sex - goodness me. That's the one I completely don't get. If you're not attracted to the person in bed with you, if he is failing to get you excited enough to want to have sex, if what you do together simply isn't stimulating enough that you have to resort to take drugs to enhance the experience - then good grief, you're having sex with the WRONG person(s) and taking drugs isn't going to fix the situation. Either find the right people you're attracted to for better sex; or have a wank instead.

… I am very liberal, I am no prude. Yet I believe that those who are resorting to taking drugs are often doing it for the wrong reasons and they should ask themselves why they are resorting to doing drugs to make themselves feel better in the first place.

I witness a lot of highly stressed people resort to drinking heavily or taking drugs because they are just so miserable and stressed from their work - like that's the answer to their problems. It's not going to solve anything, it just helps them forget their problems for a short while. If your job is making you miserable, alcohol/drugs is not the answer; a career change is what you need.

In discussing the causes of substance abuse, I am hoping that engaging others here on Trevvy in thinking about the root causes, this will be a constructive process for all involved. My motives here are completely altruistic; after all, I live in London and I see so much, too much substance abuse on the gay scene here and I think it's a really bad thing.

Stuart Koe uses drug and he get caught in a city which has zero tolerance for drug abuses.

End of story!

So what if he is Mother Theresa?

I am sure the SG Govt would have thrown Mother Theresa in jail too for the same offense.

If Stuart Koe were to seek help with his drug addiction, I am sure the SG Govt will be more than happy to help him.

But for some to claim that just becos he is an activist and have done lots for the gay community, the Govt should closed an eye to his illegal substance abuse is pure horseshit.

Go ahead and do drugs if you think you can justify it, but if you are caught, you have only yourself to blame.

I believe that people here are entitled to express their opinions - be it on the issue of substance abuse or on Mr Koe. Frankly, I believe it is a good thing - because substance abuse is indeed an issue that concerns us all; even if we're not currently indulging in it or have ever done anything pertaining to substance abuse before - there is the very real possibility that we could in the future.

Arming ourselves with the right information when that moment comes can only be a good thing - so we can make informed decisions based on good information. This engagement can be a very constructive process - as long as we don't get the usual trouble makers (as witnessed today on another thread) coming here to derail this useful process and stir up trouble.

[Guest right to different opinion]

Those here who are unhappy about some of us who post negative remarks about Stuart and his drug offense should respect we who have a different opinion about Stuart and his drug offense.

Good for you if you supports and appreciate Stuart for his activism.

But it is equally good for others if they felt that Stuart has done the gay community damages with his drug offense.

As a fellow forumer expresses it (I quote here): "If you want to do drugs, please do not front any gay rights (377A movement) or HIV awareness, you do gays and HIV+ ppl a disservice. You are giving those who would not accept us another weapon to use against our acceptance. Now the biggots will have another example to associate gays and HIV+ with drug users."

If one, by his various actions, is putting himself to be perceived as one of the key gay-right activist in Singapore, one should then make some sacrifices for the sake of the gay community. Sacrifices would include not being involved in drug offense since it is such a common misconception to link gays with drug-abuse. He ought to have known that if he is caught, it would bring damages to the very community he tried to fight for.

This is not to deny he has done some good for the community. But we should not be blind to the wrong that he has done too.

[Guest -poster-]

Those here who are unhappy about some of us who post negative remarks about Stuart and his drug offense should respect we who have a different opinion about Stuart and his drug offense.

Good for you if you supports and appreciate Stuart for his activism.

But it is equally good for others if they felt that Stuart has done the gay community damages with his drug offense.

As a fellow forumer expresses it (I quote here): "If you want to do drugs, please do not front any gay rights (377A movement) or HIV awareness, you do gays and HIV+ ppl a disservice. You are giving those who would not accept us another weapon to use against our acceptance. Now the biggots will have another example to associate gays and HIV+ with drug users."

If one, by his various actions, is putting himself to be perceived as one of the key gay-right activist in Singapore, one should then make some sacrifices for the sake of the gay community. Sacrifices would include not being involved in drug offense since it is such a common misconception to link gays with drug-abuse. He ought to have known that if he is caught, it would bring damages to the very community he tried to fight for.

This is not to deny he has done some good for the community. But we should not be blind to the wrong that he has done too.

well said.

[Guest robbey]

Then can someone please enlighten me why some news paper report addresses Sk as Dr. Stuart Koe.

Where did he get that Dr. title , surely it must be PHd somewhere or is it correspondence course.

[Guest gays & drugs]

Here is the thing: We are know drugs are bad. Based on the report Stuart Koe was found to be in possession of "drugs".

My take on it is that if he is doing it in the privacy of his own apartment, and not harming others by distributing it etc. let him be. Public figure or not, gay advocate or not, he is human. He has every right to do what he wants in the privacy of his own house.

At the end of it, the only person that is doing harm to himself is Stuart.

Unfortunately, the harm done is not only to himself but to the gay community since he has been perceived to be a key figure in the local fight for gay-rights.

Some of the local gays would not care if it was some non-prominent Tom, Dick or Harry was caught. And the local anti-gay people would not care much if it was some non-prominent gay that was caught.

When it is a prominent figure of a community being caught it is another matter - the harm done is not just to the person himself/herself but also to the community. For example, it makes a big difference if the person caught is a prominent monk of the Buddhist community or a prominent pastor of the Christian community or a prominent figure from an opposition party.

It is not true that the harm is done only to himself/herself for such prominent formal or informal leaders of their respective communities.

One of the things a gay activist should fight against is the reputation of gays being associated with drug-abuse and drug-addiction. A prominent gay activist who is caught for drug offenses would obviously not be helpful in the effort to tell the public that gays and drugs are not closely associated, just as a prominent Christian leader's actions of hatred would not be helpful to the Christian community's effort to proclaim a message of love. It will only serve to provide anti-gay people with another example to strengthen their argument that gays tend to be drug-abusers.