The role of “Protect Singapore” in the cancellation of a Science Centre event on gender and sex

The recent cancellation of a Science Centre Singapore event, scheduled for 14 June and intended to explore the distinctions between sex and gender, was officially attributed to broad public feedback.

However, this masks the more complex reality that a targeted, orchestrated campaign by a relatively obscure group, “Protect Singapore Townhall”, played a pivotal role in this outcome.

This group emerged in the public eye in 2022 when it hosted a town hall at the Singapore Expo specifically to argue against the repeal of Section 377A, a law criminalizing sex between consenting male adults, widely regarded as archaic and discriminatory. This event was part of the group’s broader agenda to resist what they perceive as the erosion of traditional social norms, particularly concerning family and marriage values.

The law, a colonial-era statute, had been the subject of intense debate and activism for many years in Singapore. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, in his National Rally Speech in August 2022, announced the government’s decision to repeal the law, citing the need to adapt to evolving social norms and to avoid potential constitutional challenges.

The repeal, enacted by the Singapore Parliament in November 2022, marked a significant step towards greater inclusivity and equality for the LGBTQ community in Singapore. However, the government also assured that it would uphold the traditional definition of marriage as between a man and a woman, balancing progressive changes with societal norms and values.

Despite the repeal, “Protect Singapore” has continued to actively campaign against broader LGBTQ rights and gender theory discussions, viewing these topics with deep suspicion and often framing them as threats to societal values.

For the Science Centre event titled “What’s the difference between sex and gender?”, the group activated its followers through a Telegram post at 3 pm on 2 June after the Science Centre made its post at 12pm.

They detailed their objections to the session’s content and the selection of speakers, which included Becca D’Bus, a drag queen; Alexander Teh, an Oogachaga youth counsellor; and Mie Hiramoto, an Associate Professor from the National University of Singapore. The group criticized the event for lacking scientific rigor and for being biased due to the speakers’ advocacy for LGBTQ issues.

The group posted detailed guidelines on talking points, urging supporters to express their concerns directly to influential figures.

They called on their followers to write to the Education Minister and the CEO of the Science Centre, outlining specific objections to the event’s content and speaker selection. They claimed these elements perpetuated “LGBTQ gender and sexuality ideologies,” which they argued are divisive and stand against the government’s promises to protect the definition of marriage and family values in Singapore.

Their strategy was effective. Within four hours of their mobilization, the Science Centre removed the particulars of the speakers, and another three hours later, it posted an announcement reevaluating the approach to the session, stating that a full cancellation and refund notice was issued.

In another Telegram post, “Protect Singapore” claimed this as a victory, asserting that their prompt action had protected public and educational spaces from being “infiltrated by LGBTQ activism.”

The group wrote:

“We thank everyone who has responded with your comments on social media or has written in to MOE and Science Centre. Your prompt and clear voices have made an immediate difference, with the Science Centre changing their course within 4 hours of our call to action. 👍🏻 Let’s continue to monitor this topic. We welcome discussions in the public space on this complex issue regarding gender dysphoria, but panels should be better curated, and should include organizations and individuals who provide scientific information on sex and gender. Our society would be better served with truth and science instead of ideologies. Let’s continue to stay watchful over the media & education space and speak up to protect our society and our young ones from being infiltrated by LGBTQ activism in the guise of science and truth.”

This self-congratulatory message was also posted on its Facebook page, and it is even paying ads to promote its victory.

This incident illustrates how even lesser-known groups can exert significant influence over public and institutional decisions through well-coordinated campaigns. The group’s ability to sway the Science Centre’s decision raises questions about the dynamics of public feedback and the vulnerability of institutions to orchestrated pressures versus spontaneous public sentiment.

Moreover, while “Protect Singapore” celebrated their influence on the cancellation as a defense of societal values, the event’s shutdown also prompted a wave of disappointment from other community members, as shown in the Science Centre’s Facebook post. These individuals lamented the lost opportunity for open discussion on nuanced and important topics.

Taara Kumar lamented the missed opportunity, saying, “This session would have been a good place to learn more about gender and sexuality! I applaud your team for the initiative. Discussions backed by sociocultural knowledge, lived experiences, and research are crucial for a healthy society.”

Eugene Lim argued forcefully for the event’s necessity, stating, “The fact that homophobes in the comments are trying their absolute hardest to bully, discriminate, and enforce a social order of willful ignorance and disregard is the EXACT reason why the Science Centre Singapore must, as an educational institution, push forth with this discussion.”