Singapore Policeman Gets Two Years for Oral Sex
Fri Nov 7, 7:55 AM ET


SINGAPORE (Reuters) - A Singaporean police sergeant has been jailed for two years for having oral sex in a country where prostitution is legal but oral sex is not, a newspaper reported Friday.

The Straits Times reported that the 27-year-old police coast guard sergeant landed in court after a 16-year-old reported to the police that she had performed oral sex on the man.


She was above the age of consent and agreed to perform the act, but oral sex is against the law in the city-state, the paper said.



Link/URL... http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=573&ncid=757&e=1&u=/nm/20031107/od_nm/sex_dc

I guess after my visit to Geyland, I am about due for four or five consecutive life sentences!! As to the hypocrites who are behind this law:

Yowie, no gum and no blowjobs, but as much prostitution as you can afford. What's with the oral fixation?

They recently eased up on gum as a result of some trade talks. Now, if you get some sort of note from your doctor or dentist that it is for purposes of oral health, you will be able to chew gum in Singapore. Maybe someone should show them the study a year or so ago suggesting that swallowing cum helps cure depression (boy, am I glad I don't suffer from that disease given the cure) and they will allow oral sex, but only with a doctor's note.

You can buy Dentene-like dental chewing gums over the counter at Pharmacies nowadays, thats the new law.

Actually Singapore's law is far from being hypocritical. Just that most people don't understand it and it seems odd if you don't understand the culture of that specific country. It is actually bold and righteous and you can't get away from stupid technicalities like in the U.S. That's why most Singapore citizens are very law abiding. And it has an extremely low crime rate.

The policeman abused his authority and got a 16 yr old girl to perform oral sex on him. That's why the judge sentenced him.

Normally in daily life you don't have to worry about receiving oral sex and getting arrested. Even at Geylang the Thai girls will give you oral sex without asking and the Malaysian Chinese will give you that plus rimjob.

-DJ

DJ: Given that us non-Singaporeans have trouble understanding that oral sex is across the board outlawed in Singapore but at the same time Geyland, with its plethora of oral sex exists in the open, could you please explain the law to us in a manner that will enable us to understand it, and conclude it is neither hypocritical, repressive, nor just plain silly?

SINGAPORE (CNN) -- Singapore authorities say they've rejected an appeal to let the controversial film "Eyes Wide Shut" run uncensored in their country.

This means the film, the last by the late director Stanley Kubrick, might never be screened there. Its distributor, Warner Bros. -- a sister Time Warner company to CNN.com -- is under contract to show it exactly as it was made.

The government-appointed Films Appeals Committee, a citizens' group with final say in such decisions, insists that a scene involving oral sex between two women be cut. It also says chanting from the Bhagavad-Gita, a sacred Hindu text -- which accompanies an orgy scene -- must be "muted or replaced."

Seems at least some Singaporeans are having the same trouble with the oral sex law I have:

"SINGAPORE, Nov 8 (AFP) - The jailing of a police officer for having oral sex with a consenting 16-year-old girl has sparked calls for the repeal of a law punishing such act, the Straits Times reported Saturday.

"Several of the 20 readers who had e-mailed the newspaper expressed shock that oral sex remained an offence under the Penal Code in the modern city-state.

"Four sexual health experts interviewed said oral sex is now common and should be decriminalised and 11 lawyers polled said the case for the law to be repealed is now stronger than before.

"They were commenting on a two-year jail sentence imposed on police sergeant Annis Abdullah, 27, for having oral sex last year with a girl who he had known through an Internet chatroom.

"News reports said the girl performed the sexual act willingly, but had lodged a police report later.

"Oral sex is considered an offence under a section of the Penal Code which states that "whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animals" can be jailed up to 10 years or even for life and fined."

Reader Christopher Low said in a letter to The Straits Times that the law was "archaic", having been a remnant of British colonial rule. Britain itself repealed a similar law in 1967, he said.

"Oral sex is part and parcel of intimacy and sex," urologist and sex therapist Li Man Kay was quoted as saying.

Clinical psychologist Yam Keng Mun added: "A lot of people see oral sex as a good substitute for intercourse. They perceive it as pretty safe, especially since the risk of pregnancy is avoided." Lawyer Sarbrinder Singh said the law should make a distinction between forced and consensual oral sex. —



Here is Christopher Low's letter to the Straits Times, which has some interesting history, which among other things calls into question the claim that to understand the law you need to understand Singapore's unique culture:

"DOES anyone not realise how archaic the law against oral sex is? There is no reason why the law should interfere in anyone's sex life. By the teenager's own admission, ('Cop jailed, career over because of oral sex'; ST, Nov 7) the act was consensual.

Section 377 of the Penal Code originated from the Indian Penal Code during the administration of the British Colony of India in 1860. Those days are consigned to history. Britain itself repealed this Victorian law in 1967.

By definition, oral sex is sex and is thus natural. By enforcing the Act, the state has made criminals of the majority of adults with a sex life.

Furthermore, the punishment is not commensurate with the crime; how is life imprisonment or a jail term of up to 10 years fair for an act that has no real victim?

Crimes such as culpable homicide not amounting to murder, attempted murder and infanticide carry a similar penalty. Voluntarily causing grievous hurt carries a far lesser penalty.

I urge MPs to debate this in Parliament and repeal Section 377 of the Penal Code.


CHRISTOPHER LOW KIN SIONG"

The law is right for the country and they shouldn't change it.

For me to explain it would enlighten some of you horny fools unnecassrily that I feel no need to do so.

But I've already said:
"Normally in daily life with your wife you don't have to worry about receiving oral sex and getting arrested."

The law is to protect the innocent from being taken advantage of. Use your freakin' heads.

Geylang is a seperate part of Singapore and in case some of you morons hadn't notice, the girls are all from other countries.

Lawyers in U.S. hate the system in Singapore because it has so little crime and so little lengthy trials that if the system were used in USA, a lot of lawyers would be out of work. Remember, don't break the law. No jury trial.

Admin: Message edited

I live in Singapore, however I won't claim to know the details of the law. However, one thing I have learned in my travels is that "letter" of the law is just one component in any society's legal system. Clearly there are many screwy laws on the books everywhere, but the main concern is how the laws are enforced. I think DJ's best assessment is that Singapoprean courts are using this sanctions allowed under this law as a way to punish a policeman who has abused his authority.

Singapore is a paradox in that for the most part the line between acceptable and punishable behavior is well understood, but most Singaporeans claim there are so many laws they don't know what they all are. Personally, I have found the reality here is that this is no where near the police state I feared it was. I am actually surprised at the extent things are live and let live. However, I do know that I shouldn't do drugs and bring in pirated DVD's and act accordingly. Furthermore, there is singnificantly less corruption and abuse of powers than anywhere else I have seen. All of these leads to a very secure environment in which a woman can with extreme confidence get totally borracho and catch a taxi home with no concerns. Can you think of any other big city where this is true. Often I times I struggle with the surprisingly pleasant outcomes of well intentioned fascism.

Having also lived in California, I do feel I get treated much more fairly and courteously with the Government entities here than I ever did in the US. I don't want to US bash because I truly love my homeland because it is the greatest land of opportunity on earth. However, people like LAguy shouldn't throw stones when living in glass houses. They are way too many civil injustices in the US to outrage and mobilise us Americans. For example, the effective criminalization of prostitution in the US looks as outrageous to a Singaporean (and most of the world) as the Blow Job law looks to you. For heaven sakes, even Muslim countries like Malaysia and Indonesia is much less an enforced criminal activity.

Mongerx: If you saw anything in my post that suggests I support the laws in the U.S. please tell me. I think some of the one's concerning sex are as ridiculous as the one I cited from Singapore. I actually like Singapore but would like them to get rid of that particular law, as apparently do many Singaporeans. I also am wondering where you got your information that the policeman abused his authority and that is why he was prosecuted. I didn't see anything in the press reports to suggest that was the case, although I may have missed it.

Admin: Message edited

Fornication is still illegal in Virginia as are interracial marriages as are open businesses on Sundays in many Maryland counties. The idiotic old laws never got repealed, just stopped getting enforced.

Mongerx, probably better not discuss this particular issue with the 'little woman', though. Wouldn't want her getting any ideas when the PMS gets out of control!

Hey Porker, thankfully the missus understands that she won't go to Changi Prison for extracting the soya milk from little x. As for PMS, yikes! Three tequila shots each, a bucket of tears for her, and an angry fuck anywhere except the bed seems like the only combo that can pacify that condition a modicum.

LAguy- I agree you never said you loved the laws of the Old USA. However, you should be aware that my perception you are hypocritically bashing Singapore is likely the one that others will hold when you come out guns a blazing as above. I am not arguing that your position on the BJ law is wrong (all vice laws are just anti freedom in my opinion), just commenting on the impression your tact may create. You seem like a very seasoned traveller and I am sure you are already aware of what I am saying.

As for the local view that the policeman abused his authority. The guys 27 and she is 16. She is passed the age of consent so no indictment is possible for underage sex. Therefore they turn to the arcane BJ law. It like busting AL Capone for tax evasion. Locally, there have been some editorials condemming the cop for his poor judgement (Of course this is from the government sympathetic monopoly media outlet. In Singapore, poor judgement by the police is very frowned upon. It's this attitude that keeps corruption very low, especially at the street level.

Anyways, I am glad you like Singapore and hope you return sometime. If you do, it would be my honor to raise glasses, break bread, and chase hotties with you.

Mongerx, you post on Tuesday is absolutely correct. The media often sensationalized Singapore as being a police state, which is very far from the truth. Living in Singapore is actually quite free and safe.


As to Christopher Low's comments, a lot of it is just wrong. He say "There is no reason why the law should interfere in anyone's sex life." Firstly, they don't interfere. If your wife suck your dick everyday, no one cares.

The girl was 15 when that happened and 16 when she reportred it. The laws in Singapore does not interfere with people's sex lives to any appreciable extent. If laws cannot interfere with one's sex life at all, then Micheal Jackson can have all the sex life he wants.

"By enforcing the Act, the state has made criminals of the majority of adults with a sex life." -Christopher Low. Again he is suggesting the state has been enforcing the law and making people criminals.

But it is unwise for some foreigner who don't know shit about living in the country to start calling people hypocrites and to start asking people to swallow cum.

The sentence was right and so was the judge. The law has a purpose in that it protects the innocent in a country where the majority of female population are not as casual about sex as say American women. You would be glad if you are raising your daughter in Singapore.

-Dick Johnson