From Rob Phillips, the audience learnt that there is not a single dedicated gay bar in all of India. From Chris Tan, we heard about how Singapore’s gay bars gradually clustered themselves in the Chinatown area.
Each country takes its own trajectory when it comes to the emergence of its gay community.
In the case of India, the internet arrived before identity formation has matured, and the internet therefore is the means by which that identity formation is being realised. Through it, middle-class Indians discover fellow homosexuals and organise themselves for social events as well for political activism.
It is not just a big city phenomenon, said Phillips. Even villages nowadays have internet cafes with dial-up connections, enabling those in relatively remote locations to become conscious of an emerging sense of community.
However, the social climate remains deeply conservative. From his observations of online contacts, many Indians are married despite homosexual desires. Online-organised parties take place quite often in homes or gay-friendly restaurants, complete with strict rules about acceptable behaviour. Same-sex dancing is almost unheard of. Sometimes, the windows of the homes are covered up with paper for the events, so that neighbours cannot spy on the goings-on.
Meanwhile, police in various cities continually carry out sweeps of known cruising grounds with many arrests. Phillips himself observed one such incident first-hand. Most surprisingly of all, the chief question on the police’s minds was ”Are you married?” There didn’t even seem to be language for sexual orientation.
Yet, perhaps because of the escalating HIV problem in India, the health issue provides an entry point for political debate. Article 377 of the Indian Penal Code is currently being challenged in the courts, at least partly on the ground that this law creates discrimination against homosexual men with respect to access to health care.
In his paper, Chris Tan traced the development of the “gay ghetto” of Singapore to the government’s plans for the conservation of Chinatown. As the 5-foot-way shophouses were gentrified starting from the late 1980s, many were emptied of the old trades. Since the government left it to the market, with only minimal exceptions, to determine what new trades could inhabit the conserved buildings, there arose an opportunity for gay businesses to colonise a few of them.
Still, the gay businesses remain quite discreet, and very few outside the gay community would be aware that there are a number of gay bars, massage parlours and saunas in the area.
Tan thought it was rather interesting to see how the commodification of the gay culture was symbiotic with the govenrment’s gentrification and tourisation of Chinatown.

But why Chinatown? Was it solely a case of businesses clustering together to benefit from critical mass? Or was there something about other ethnic quarters that was considered by owners to be unhelpful to business?
It was a small, intimate audience of about 15 people, but its smallness had its advantages, allowing a high degree of participation during discussions that went into considerable depth.
Â


Wow! Alex, you sure work fast, getting the review out and posted on-line less than 24 hours after the talk!!
It was an interesting and cerebral evening, a session that proves that GLBT activities need not necessarily focus on parties, music, fancy togs, drinks and open bars. Too bad not more people were present, but like Alex stated, there was that level of intimacy that a larger forum might not have been able to offer….
Through Rob’s paper, which was delivered so animatedly by Roy, we learnt that the current situation for the local GLBT community, though far from being ideal, is not as bad as that in India. It certainly helps us to keep things in perspective.
As for Chris’ paper on Chinatown as a “gay ghetto”, I suspect that a large part has to do with Singapore’s land use zoning system. In shophouses that are zoned for ‘Commercial’ uses, ALL types of businesses can be allowed, without segregation of whether these are gay businesses or not.
This was perhaps an opening through which the gay ventures were able to gain a foothold in the area. Other businesses probably did not find the location and/or conservation requirements that conducive, whereas gay business owners, with a keener eye for aesthetics and strong affinity for history and heritage, found the right place to be.
Chris’ study focused mainly on places for gay males (at least based on the examples he raised). I wonder whether there is a similar cluster pattern that developed for business ventures that cater specifically to lesbians?
Last but not least, my suggestion is to have this theme of comparative studies across countries/cities for future IndigNations. Keep up the good work, all!