There is a parallel development that goes with the political insecurities of the BN government - the targeting of the ‘morally indefensible’ issues like sodomy, sex, and ‘sissy’ boys. I don’t know if this phenomenon is accidental but these issues seem to crop up whenever the government is at the tipping point of losing its plot. Take the issue of Anwar’s Sodomy Trial for instance. The first Sodomy thunderstorm came at the height of political conflicts in 1998 between PM Mahathir and his supposedly trusted and very popular successor, Anwar Ibrahim. How to undo the popular and a much needed moderate Muslim politician like Anwar in a country divided by ethnicity and religious beliefs? Not much of political or financial hullabaloos could scandalize Anwar’s public credibility. Hence the morally indefensible sin of having carnal intercourse with the same sex seemed to be the most appealing measure to destroy Anwar’s political persona as well as his moral stature as a Muslim public figure.
In 1999, he was sentenced to six years in prison for corruption, and in 2000, to another nine years for sodomy. In 2004, the Federal Court reversed the second conviction and he was released. The Sodomy Trial no. 1 was at best, a homoerotic bubble designed to titillate the minds of the populace too caught up in the world of materialistic consumption and production - after all the 90’s was the golden era of spend, spend, and spend. The only downside was the lack of internet connection, and most of us had to rely on the main stream media that was only too eager to orchestrate and spin the public fear of moral decadence. After more than a decade of supposed moral peace, out came Anwar again and the motley crew of successful candidates from PKR, DAP and PAS who unexpectedly smothered quite a lot of the hare brained BN politicians in the March 2008 General Election, doing a very good job of demolishing Pak Lah’s uninspiring lame duck premiership.
In July 2008, Anwar was arrested over allegations he sodomised one of his male aides, and faces new sodomy charges in the Malaysian courts. The impending Sodomy Trial no.2 however did not deter Anwar from being elected as an MP in the Permatang Pauh by-election in August 2008. Whilst the trial is still going on, a sex tape implicating an ‘Anwar’ look-alike began to emerge on the day the Sarawak Legislative Assembly was dissolved. There were even reports that the sex tapes were distributed in Sarawak to discredit the leader of the PR coalition. It is debatable whether such sordid revelation had really tarnished Anwar’s image as a devout Muslim, but the fact remains that there is widespread fear and hostility against people who are ‘born this way’ ala Lady Gaga.
The most recent issue involves the Education Ministry’s policy to straighten 66 ‘sissy’boys in a camp at Besut, Terengganu. This policy has attracted condemnation from activists and NGOs alike. Oyoung is particularly vocal against such unprecedented form of education that aims to ‘fix’ boys who tend to displayeffeminate behaviours. There are others like the Joint Action Groupfor Gender Equality claiming that this latest government attempt is a gross violationof human right. And surprisingly Datuk Sharizat Abdul Jalil, Malaysian women’s minister, is also critical of the antigay camp saying thatsuch policy actually violates the Child Act 2001 and should be abolished.
I am particularly attracted to a comment on Mkini that was directed at Oyoung’s article, it reads, ‘No matter how you twist and turn, being a pondan or tomboy is not natural. Neither is being gay. So please don't bring your sodomism to our society. We can coexist but don't shove your ideas down our throats.’ There are so many layers of emotions – fear, anger, disgust, aggression and self-righteousness packed in a couple of sentences.
In many cases of homophobic attacks on gay people, the element of dehumanization of gays is very saturated in the antigay rhetoric and the intense brutality that characterizes many hate crimes against sexual minorities are fairly consistent with the emotion of anger than fear. The danger of not wanting to reveal their true selves out of the fear of being mentally or/and physically assaulted, is not an imagined fear, but the result of a real insecurity conditioned by the mainstream antigay perception.
In the contemporary research on sexuality and gender studies, there are three general arenas in which hostility based on sexual orientation need to be challenged and hopefully studied further. The three arenas of antigay hostility include, in respective order - sexual stigma, hetero-sexism and sexual prejudice. First, sexual stigma - such hostility exists in the form of shared knowledge that is embodied in cultural ideologies that define sexuality, demarcate social groupings based on it, and assign value to those groups and their members. Second, hetero-sexism - these ideologies are expressed through society’s structure, institutions and power relations. Third, sexual prejudice - individuals internalize these ideologies and, through their attitudes and actions, express, may either reinforce or challenge them.
The third arena, sexual prejudice, is internal, inside a person’s head. It cannot be directly observed and it must be inferred from overt behaviours. Such behaviours might consist of mild, verbal and non-verbal expression ranging from discomfort to the manifestation of the extreme act of perpetrating discrimination or violence against sexual minorities.
These issues are big, not chewable in a day, but hopefully readers would seek further knowledge about why we need to challenge the injustices associated with antigay hostilities. Are we prepared to challenge these injustices as believers and non-believers alike? As for our political state of affairs, the plot-less game of moral panic continues and when this does not stop, someone, somebody’s child, somebody’s friend, could be a victim of physical and mental assault.
