Report on Harmful Masculinity Norms in Singapore

by The Healthy Masculinity Project

Callan Tham
Douglas Lee-O’Loughlin PhD
E-Wen Tan
Ghazali Muzakir
Syed Ubaydillah Alatas
And 7 anonymous contributors

Executive Summary

The Healthy Masculinity Project is a group of male Singaporean Citizens and Permanent Residents dedicated to starting a conversation on gender inequality from the perspective of men, with a goal of promoting healthy masculinity and investigating how harmful masculinity and its effects has surfaced as both a cause and mechanism for the perpetuation of gender inequality. We believe that addressing harmful masculinity norms is an essential and effective step in achieving gender equality in Singapore, as it will aid in promoting a better quality of life for both men and women.

This paper analyses harmful masculinity norms in the Singaporean context, using a combination of surveys and interviews with primarily male respondents. Even though our respondents defined harmful masculinity norms in a broad range of ways, an overwhelming majority of them picked out three behaviours that are characteristic of such norms, namely exhibiting power over women, dominance, and a propensity for violence. Our respondents indicated that they have witnessed or experienced these behaviours in a variety of settings, such as in school, at social settings, and also during their time in National Service (NS). Some of our respondents had also agreed to be interviewed about their own personal experiences with harmful masculinity norms, and some of their accounts have been included in this paper.

From these responses, we have identified two key missed opportunities to tackle the issue of harmful masculinity norms in Singapore: our Sexuality Education (SEd) programme in schools, and NS. Both the SEd programme and NS are a cornerstone of shaping the young Singaporean male identity, and are currently not providing the best opportunities in modeling healthy masculinity norms and behaviours. The gaps in the SEd programme and the existing culture in NS are some of the key reasons for the perpetuation of gender inequality, causing long-term harm to both men and women.

Lastly, we present some suggestions for tackling the issue of harmful masculinity norms, which include a national study on masculinity, improving access to mental health services, improving the SEd programme in schools, and applying stricter rules in NS institutions.

I. Introduction

1. In recent conversations around gender equality and feminism, the issue of harmful masculinity and its effects has surfaced as both a cause and mechanism for the perpetuation of gender inequality. This paper defines harmful masculinity norms as aspects of male identity that are socially created and reinforced, and manifest in unhealthy expectations of male behaviour, leading to negative social, psychological, physical and emotional impacts on men and society at large. Addressing these harmful masculinity norms is an essential step in confronting the issue of gender inequality more broadly and effectively.

This paper analyses harmful masculinity norms in the Singaporean context, and studies the ways in which these norms affect both men and women. Using a combination of surveys and interviews with primarily male respondents, we have collected and processed data relevant to masculine behaviours that are seen by them to be harmful. In addition to the quantitative survey data collected, qualitative stories from the interviewees are used to capture the severity and impact of their experience, and illustrate how these norms have harmful effects on themselves and others. At the end of this paper, our group has also proposed missed opportunities and possible solutions to addressing such harmful masculinity norms, using the observations we made from the research data. Through the information and propositions provided, this study aims to add clarity to the discourse of masculinity and its effects on men and women in Singapore.

II. What do harmful masculinity norms look like?

In order to ground our investigation into harmful masculinity norms in the lived reality and experiences of Singaporeans, we looked to our survey data to establish (a) a general, consensus definition of the most common attitudes and behaviours associated with these norms; and (b) a nuanced sense of the full range of behaviours that our predominantly male respondents themselves found to be ‘harmful’.

Our survey was conducted over a period of 10 days (between 11 June and 21 June), and was distributed online and by word-of-mouth, through snowball sampling relying on the participants’ networks. 115 unique individuals responded, 85% of whom identified as men. A range of ages, educational backgrounds and professional experiences were represented, from freelance artists and private tutors, to civil servants and engineers. The sample also included current students and unemployed persons. 77.4% of the respondents had rendered National Service — an experience that featured heavily in their discussion of harmful masculinity norms.

In the first section of the survey, participants were asked to:

a. Provide their own definition of harmful masculinity norms (‘What does “harmful masculinity norms” mean to you?’);

b. Select behaviours from a drop-down list associated with harmful masculinity norms (‘Which of the following negative behaviours would you associate with Harmful Masculinity Norms?’); and

c. Describe other behaviours that fell within this category (‘What other negative behaviours do you associate with harmful masculinity norms?’).

Defining ‘Harmful Masculinity Norms’

In general, participants framed their understanding of harmful masculinity norms in two key ways. Some described them as behaviours and attitudes normalised among men, which had negative consequences for men themselves, and/or those around them. These included attitudes towards themselves (e.g. ‘an unhealthy outlook towards appearance’), as well as towards others (e.g. ‘bullying those who are weaker or less vocal’). Others saw harmful masculinity norms as the product of societal pressures and expectations that prompted men to perform masculinity in certain ways. For instance, the belief that ‘a real man doesn’t cry or talk about his feelings because he is strong’ could lead to the performance of toughness or machismo. While we note that these two framings are not mutually exclusive (societal expectations can often be normalised or internalised), participants tended to choose one or the other when presenting their own definitions of harmful masculinity norms.

Notably, the range of definitions was broad, and did not only include behaviour and attitudes towards women (or non-heterosexual men), such as objectification and degradation, even though these were the focus of some participants’ responses. Of particular concern were a small minority of responses which highlighted actions involving bodily harm to self or others, including hazing activities, as well as not seeking or recognising sexual consent. A larger number of responses, however, considered ‘harm’ in its broader sense of causing psychological distress to others (such as through name-calling, ‘mansplaining’ and other speech acts), or to self (such as by diminishing or over-inflating one’s self-esteem). There was wide recognition that regardless of the source of these norms, they caused a significant and unacceptable level of harm to the individual and society, especially when reified through culture and belief.

When asked to list behaviours associated with harmful masculinity norms, 4 in 5 (or more) respondents selected a ‘propensity for violence’, ‘dominance’, and ‘exhibiting power over women’ as key behaviours. Four other behaviours or traits, namely, ‘lack of appropriate emotional control’, ‘disdain for sexual minorities’, ‘the need to win’ and ‘prioritising sexual needs’ were also selected by more than half of the respondents (see Figure 1):

Figure 1

It may be observed that the three most commonly-selected behaviours above — exhibiting power over women, dominance, and propensity for violence — are likely to have more proactive manifestations in daily life (e.g. with concrete actions exhibiting dominance over others). The next four listed — lack of appropriate emotional control, disdain for sexual minorities, the need to win, and prioritising sexual needs — are more passive in nature (e.g. with a ‘lack of emotional control’ being more easily observed at points of stress or conflict). Nevertheless, they present a composite picture of what respondents observe and recognise as the manifestations of harmful masculinity norms in their interactions with others. It may also be observed that a significant minority of respondents (between 20–40%) selected ‘self-reliance’, ‘risk-taking’, ‘pursuit of status’ and ‘work as purpose/identity’ as being associated with harmful masculinity norms — all of which are traits which often surface in public discourse as valuable or celebrated qualities, especially in male leaders. This observation points us to the fact that these traits may indeed be double-edged swords, perpetuating more invisible, but no less real, harms.

Finally, when asked to list other behaviours (i.e. not on the drop-down list) associated with harmful masculinity norms, respondents’ answers could once again be grouped into two categories: behaviours observed in male-only spaces (e.g. ‘locker room talk’), and behaviours observed in interactions with women and others (e.g. ‘belittling others to fit in’, or showing ‘condescension’). A significant number of respondents highlighted the ‘silencing’ effect of male behaviour on others, including through an ‘inability to understand emotion and express it’, or through coating conversations in a ‘veneer of rationality and logic’. These responses highlight that beyond what might be seen as overtly chauvinistic behaviour (e.g. bragging about sexual exploits), more subtle patterns of speech and action are also increasingly being recognised as having the potential to cause harm. The more frequently-cited responses in this section will be discussed in greater depth in the following section.

III. What are the negative impacts that arise as a result of these harmful masculinity norms?

The behaviours most commonly associated with harmful masculinity norms by respondents were: propensity for violence, power over women, and dominance. These are commonly propagated as normal masculine behaviours, and regularly portrayed in popular media as desirable masculine traits that indicate strength. However, there are long-term harms on the men who exhibit such behaviours, individuals subject to those behaviours, as well as society at large.

Singapore’s crime statistics show that an average of 1,190 cases of “outrage of modesty” have been reported annually between 2016 to 2020, an increase of 24% from 2011 to 2015. Rape cases have also been increasingly reported, from 162 in 2015, to 282 in 2019. The World Health Organisation’s guidelines on sexual violence indicate that sexual crimes such as outrage of modesty and rape are essentially violent crimes about asserting power and control over victims. These crimes are strongly linked with the harmful behaviours identified by our respondents.

In addition, sexist and sexual slurs are commonly used as tools for asserting power and dominance over women and sexual minorities. Such language is used to establish social orders that excludes and ostracises its targets. Widespread use of such language objectifies women and sexual minorities, enabling continued violence and domination against them.

Respondents have indicated that they encounter such behaviour in school (64.3%), among friends and social settings (60%), and during their national service (57.4%). While these are the settings that most respondents have seen or experienced such behaviour, almost half have also experienced this at work and at home (49.6%).

We have reached out to several respondents to get more detailed accounts, and have collated several of their responses below.

Harmful masculinity norms in a school setting: Ben’s story

Ben*, a 27-year-old who works in media, suffered such abuse in primary and secondary school, where he was physically and verbally abused by his peers. A soft-spoken boy who preferred playing with dolls as opposed to playing sports, he would often be labelled as “sissy”, “gay”, or “faggot”. Because of his weight, he would also have his chest and buttocks slapped and touched invasively by his class- and school-mates, who knew that Ben would not confront them. Ben received no support from his teachers whenever he reported these incidents, making him feel isolated. The bullying eventually escalated to further provocations from the bullies, who would steal his homework and even his clothes.

“My father told me I could just fight back”, Ben told us, indicating the same lack of support from his parents. Ben’s father also policed Ben’s behaviour, including the way he walked, as he saw it as effeminate and therefore problematic. The bullying only subsided after Ben joined a uniformed group CCA and learned to assert himself more.

During NS, Ben came out as gay. Even though he was not a victim of bullying during this time, he recalled conversations between his fellow conscripts about the bragging of sexual prowess and conquests, through the use of terms such as “body count” and questions about girlfriends and sexual activity.

Harmful masculinity norms in National Service: Steve’s and Charlie’s stories

Steve*, a 21-year-old undergraduate, related a similar experience during his time in Basic Rescue Training (BRT), with enquiries about girlfriends and bragging of various sexual conquests, mostly by heterosexual men. Steve found it problematic that most of the time, these topics made up the majority of the conversations amongst his fellow conscripts. While conversations of this nature became less prevalent after Steve was assigned to his station, they never stopped.

“NS was a culture shock for me, because of how hyper-masculinity was presented as the default model of masculinity,” with traits such as dominance being valued above ‘softer’ traits such as compassion. Steve did not believe that possessing the valued traits necessarily translated into being a good serviceman or a good person in general. He also explained that with NS being such an integral part of the Singaporean male growing up experience, “turning boys into men”, it is a ripe environment for harmful masculinity norms to be perpetuated.

In addition, Steve was sexually harassed by his superior officer during his service. What bothered Steve even more than the sexual harassment itself was how indignant his harasser became when he himself was assaulted in the same way by someone who was lower-ranked. Steve said that “He complained to his colleagues by saying ‘what makes him think he can do that?’, completely ignoring how he did the same to me.” This led Steve to understand that sexual harassment and assault has little to do with sexuallity and attraction, but rather about asserting dominance and power. He was not the only victim of sexual harassment in his unit.

Steve eventually confronted the officer right before his Operationally Ready Date (ORD), and “[the officer] acknowledged all of the things I confronted him about, except for the sexual harassment.”

“NS has a huge part to play in this, because it’s supposed to help us grow as individuals,” Steve said, but the culture surrounding NS has to change, “so we can change how we view and associate certain traits and behaviours with the idea of manhood.”

Charlie*, a 20-year-old full-time National Serviceman (NSF), related a similar experience about NS and BMT. “BMT felt like I was in Sec 1 all over again”, said Charlie, as he recalled his time in secondary school where he was bullied and targeted through the use of slurs. “It was aggressive, and definitely not affectionate; the only difference was that the slurs used were also in dialect.” Charlie also felt alienated because of the way masculinity was presented,through the common use of casually misogynistic language that belittled women, portrayed women as the weaker gender,and regarded women as prizes. What made it worse for Charlie was that this was accepted by almost everyone, and even an expected way for men to behave. “Even the commanders were doing it,” further establishing a model of behaviour for impressionable young men.

“‘My grandmother can run faster than you’ is a phrase every NSF knows and hears, from the beginning of BMT,” said Charlie. He also recalled that the female recruits in Pegasus company, the only co-ed BMT company, were often objectified by the male recruits and commanders. This led Charlie to conclude that NS is often when harmful masculinity norms start to be ingrained.

Charlie also knew a fellow NSF who routinely went through security footage of women visitors to his camp, seemingly secure at how normal this behaviour is and knowing he will not be punished for it. “BMT is like a haven for harmful masculinity norms, it goes unchecked by, maybe even tacitly accepted by those in positions of authority.”

Charlie was also subject to bullying in his primary and secondary school days, with other boys bumping into him on purpose and using the opportunity to call him a “faggot”, which led him to prefer hanging out with girls instead. Charlie would eventually fear simple routines such as going to the bathroom because of the bullying. Charlie eventually accepted his own sexual orientation when he was 14 years old, but knew that acknowledgin is sexuality came with a cost: “being gay has social implications; there was a clear, established pecking order, and I was at the bottom.” But accepting his own identity also meant that he was able to ignore the insults thrown his way, and allowed him to find his niche in secondary school, where he thrived.

Harmful masculinity norms in a familial setting: Mei Ling’s story

Mei Ling*, a 32-year-old postgraduate student, grew up surrounded by a more subtle form of harmful masculinity norms: her father would belittle and disrespect her mother, negatively influencing Mei Ling’s relationship with her mother. “I’m still closer to my dad than my mom,” Mei Ling told us. While her father has mellowed over the years, he still cannot trust Mei Ling’s mother to make a simple dinner reservation, and has not realised that his behaviour at home disrespected his wife or caused other negative effects on his children.

She described her father as an “angry person”, saying that her family has always had “shouty” interactions, as well as someone who feels inferior to his siblings for not doing as well as them in terms of career or earnings. “My dad didn’t get to study as much as my aunts and uncles,” which contributed to his sense of frustration, and he would often come home from work carrying that frustration with him. Her father would also constantly compare the academic results between Mei Ling and her younger brother, with physical punishment often meted out to her brother, whenever Mei Ling did better in school. Mei Ling’s brother grew up with anger management issues, and in turn physically abused Mei Ling; it took years before her brother, now a father, realised the cycle of abuse needed to be broken if he was to be a better father.

“[My brother] told me it felt like dad was taking out his frustrations on him,” Mei Ling said. It is with the benefit of hindsight she reflected on how true that was; with her better academic results, she was not the one who was punished, and she had internalised the physical abuse as “tough love and strict parenting”. Looking back, she identifies this environment and her father’s behaviour in fostering it, as a key reason for why they lacked the “tools and language to share our feelings.”

Mei Ling’s ex-boyfriend in her early-20s also exhibited harmful masculinity norms: verbally abusive, manipulative, and controlling over most aspects of her life, from studies to diet. Mei Ling wonders how many men like her father and her ex-boyfriend are out there, not knowing the harm their behaviour causes to the women and men around them.

* Names have been changed to protect the identities and privacy of our respondents.

IV. What ‘missed opportunities’ are there to address harmful masculinity norms?

Sexuality Education

The official account

Sexuality Education (SEd) in schools is meant to allow students to understand the physical and socio-emotional changes they experience as they age. The aim is to allow them to develop healthy relationships, including those with members of the opposite sex, and make wise and informed decisions with respect to sexuality. The core tenet of MOE’s SEd programme is that the family is the basic unit of society. As such, there is a major focus on healthy, heterosexual marriages and stable nuclear family units. SEd is based on respect for the values and beliefs of Singapore’s different ethno-religious communities on issues surrounding sexuality.

The 6 guiding principles of Sexuality Education as per the Ministry’s website are as follows:

• Parents play the primary role in educating their children and are responsible for teaching and transmitting values on sex and sexuality.
• Our educators will impart knowledge, skills and values that reflect that of Singapore’s mainstream society so that students will make informed and responsible decisions on sexuality matters.
• Aligned with our national values of encouraging heterosexual married couples to have healthy relationships with each other, and to build stable nuclear family units with extended family support.
• Only specially selected and trained teachers will teach Sexuality Education.
• Students and teachers are to respect the different attitudes, values and beliefs that different communities may have.
• Relevant community resources that are aligned and approved by MOE may be used to supplement schools’ programmes.

These guiding principles are enacted through subjects that include topics on sexuality, namely, the sciences and Character and Citizenship Education (CCE). The content is grouped into five main themes: Human Development, Interpersonal Relationships, Sexual Health, Sexual Behaviour, and Culture, Society and Law.

Systemic Shortcomings

Whilst no system is perfect, there are some inherent flaws in MOE’s Sexuality Education programme that may shape how young Singaporeans see gender roles, sexuality, and eventually masculinity. The impact is especially seen in young teenage boys. At this age, the gap between physical and emotional or cognitive maturity may lead to impulsive actions. Given that there is a need for peer acceptance at this age, teenage boys can behave in various ways: from being aggressive to victimizing others; from being bullied to being victims. This has a major impact on their socio-emotional development and can affect their self-worth, personal conviction and lead to a warped understanding of behaviour, gender roles and masculinity. This can have major impact on them in the future when certain undesirable behaviours are reinforced during National Service, at the workplace, or in the group chats they share with hundreds of other men.

The recent spate of sexual misconduct, misogyny and violence against women suggests that at some point, our national SEd has not fully fulfilled its intent. There remain many Singaporeans who are unable to benefit from what the programme promises: healthy relationships, understanding sexuality, and being respectful towards others.

To remain relevant to recent developments, the government has made some major changes to the SEd curriculum. Some of the latest revamps include “new topics such as how to protect themselves from crimes such as cyber flashing and voyeurism”. According to Assoc Prof Jason Tan of the Policy, Curriculum and Leadership (PCL) Department at the National Institute of Education (NIE), these revamps are happening because of the “growing reports about the use of digital technologies for voyeuristic acts and the rise of social media has brought along with it offences such as online sexual grooming.” Hence, optimistically, even at the policy level, it seems that there is enough foresight to know that SEd needs to change.

However, some questions remain unanswered: Is the change happening in the right way and at the right speed? Are key issues such as harmful masculinity norms being discussed adequately? Are students (especially young teenage boys) clearly shown how pornography affects them and their relationships? Do all schools and learning institutions have a proper SEd programme that is able to address the increasingly curious digital natives? Are parents properly guided to be able to handle such important discussions?

Let us tackle these questions one at a time to see the main shortcomings of the existing programmes, based on our discussions with past recipients of SEd of various age groups (aged 19–45). There were three main conclusions: most of them only remember the vivid images of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs) shared by the Health Promotion Board (HPB) from their SEd sessions; none of them remember discussing major topics such as pornography (which means that the lessons were not enduring enough); many said that the main problem with the SEd lessons is that it was just endless slides that teachers would go through. These discussions suggest that students going through the current SEd programme do not feel engaged by it, and rather than a piecemeal approach of adding, removing, or revising topics in the programme, a thorough review of the SEd programme is necessary, from covering taboo topics such as pornography, to getting parents involved, to length of the SEd programme, and even the delivery by instructors, to ensure youths are engaged and positively influenced..

When it comes to the topic of pornography, it is hard to find accurate data on how much schools do talk about it. Some teachers who were interviewed mentioned that the school had some sections on pornography. It was hard to point out exactly what was taught beyond the definition and vilification of pornography. In and of itself, this does nothing to prepare a young mind to deal with a topic so complex and appealing to one’s curiosity. Other teachers from local secondary schools especially said that the topic was “taboo” and not even broached in the classroom. This gap in coverage means we are not sufficiently preparing our youth, and young boys in particular, for their eventual discovery of sexual relations via pornography online or through various forms of popular media. Without preparation, exposure to sexually exploitative videos of men abusing women, or pornography that escalate into violence, young boys can quite possibly develop negative and unhealthy views of sex and consider that to be accepted behaviour. If schools are not doing their part in having this discussion, we are headed for much more sexual misconduct cases and it is plausible to extend that to increasing violence against women.

Next we need to think whether all schools and other education institutions have a proper SEd programme. Based on what we see on MOE’s website, the Growing Years (GY) and Empowered Teens (eTeens), are to be implemented as part of the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum. As such from Primary 5 to JC/MI, these programmes are adopted to varying degrees. Even “independent and faith-based government-aided schools have their own sexuality education programmes but these must be aligned to the MOE” (MOE, 2021). There is a huge lacuna there. Do polytechnics and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) conduct sexuality education? A small sample size of students from these institutions said that these were not discussed at all. Teenagers of this age are fast approaching sexual maturity and there is no discussion of how to handle relationships. Teenage boys of this age group, who are on the verge of NS and adulthood, are not even exposed to the idea of healthy sexual relations, let alone healthy masculinity. This in our opinion is a major let down and any review of sexual education and talks of gender issues must pay attention to this blindspot.

Quality of our SEd programme aside, it cannot only be left to schools only to have such an important discussion. This is perhaps the biggest wall that we will have to breach. 93.9% of our survey respondents adamantly believe that discussions about masculinity and sexuality have to happen at home as well. Culturally, it is taboo to have such discussions at home, even amongst younger parents. As long as we do not open up and decide to have this uneasy conversation with your children, we are going to continue seeing unhealthy sexual conduct and unhealthy masculinity norms being perpetuated. Parents being willing to have this conversation with their children are able to learn new things about their children and perhaps can understand their own biases. In and of itself, this seems like a win-win.

National Service

As mentioned in section II, when asked to characterise harmful masculinity norms relevant to Singapore’s context, our respondents identified various actions and behaviours associated with these norms which are unique to male-dominated environments. Perhaps the most noteworthy of these environments are the NS institutions, namely the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF), the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) and the Singapore Police Force (SPF). Given the considerable influence these institutions have on the Singaporean society, it is necessary to explore how their structures have encouraged the perpetuation of the harmful masculinity norms that have been outlined thus far.

Before problematizing the manifestations of harmful masculinity norms, it is important to first establish that masculinity in itself is not problematic, but rather, becomes problematic in various situations;

1. When the construction of masculinity results in an expectation that all males must be masculine, and if they are not, they are inferior to those who are.
2. When the masculine expectation is unrealistic, subsequently harming the individual’s mental and/or physical health.
3. When the promotion of masculinity is practiced by means of belittling femininity and/or objectifying women.

It is in these situations that masculinity turns into harmful masculinity, and as identified by our respondents, they tend to manifest most prominently in male-dominated environments such as the above-mentioned NS institutions. Of the various recounted actions and behaviours associated with harmful masculinity norms in NS institutions, we would like to draw attention to the use of sexual and misogynistic language during the basic and vocational training period.

As pointed out by our male respondents who have served NS, the use of misogynistic language is a strategy commonly employed as a way to degrade the trainees, and this is done with the intention of strengthening their mental and physical capabilities, which is a fundamental goal of the basic and vocational training. Because misogynistic language falsely narrates the inferiority and undesirability of the characteristics deemed to be inherently ‘feminine’, the intention is to utilize such language to label the trainees as equally inferior and undesirable servicemen if and when they exhibit these characteristics during training. These characteristics may include a lack of physical strength, meekness, and the inability to suppress emotions. According to the respondents, these characteristics were illustrated through the utterance of common words and phrases such as “gu niang”, “pussy” and “my grandmother can run faster than you”. Various other misogynistic and homophobic slurs were previously recounted in Steve and Charlie’s stories in Section III. Both of them also pointed out that this type of language was commonly used by the training instructors in all positions of authority; it was not only used by the training instructors who were NSFs, but by the regulars as well.

The ultimate goal of labelling the trainees with these degrading terms which are ironically meant to be motivational is to ingrain in their minds that exhibiting these supposedly feminine characteristics is a shortcoming not only in a male, but in a male serviceman, and that they should desire and labor to eliminate such shortcomings in order to become men who are worthy and capable of serving the nation.

While we have previously established that masculinity in itself is not problematic, we simultaneously argue that femininity is not problematic either. Hence, while it is understood and accepted that a variety of characteristics such as fearlessness, fierceness and physical strength are important for a front liner to possess, these characteristics should not be taught or exhibited by means of belittling femininity, simply because being feminine does not preclude possessing these characteristics. The notion that women are less capable of occupying jobs as front liners has been debunked by the many women who do serve as Singapore’s front liners today. This shows that an individual’s mental and physical capabilities should not be determined by how masculine or feminine they are, regardless of whether they are male or female. Therefore, while training NS men to possess the above-mentioned characteristics is not problematic, it becomes harmful and in fact destructive to gender equality when training them to adopt those characteristics is conducted through the belittling of women and femininity. When interviewed, Steve had the opinion that “Misogyny is not a prerequisite for manhood”. In other words, a man can still be fearless, fierce and physically strong without having to not only belittle, but falsely characterize the emotional, mental and physical capabilities of a woman.

The persistence of this misogynistic culture in NS institutions is problematic in many ways, firstly because it results in a misguided understanding of the intended purpose of NS. Because masculinity and the ability to serve are often conflated, the primary function of NS as a policy to aid in the protection of Singapore’s security and sovereignty instead turns into a mission of molding young boys into becoming socially acceptable men, whose characteristics are harmful on both an individual and societal level.

This wide-scale harm is in essence, the second and arguably more detrimental problem that arises. Environments so entrenched in harmful masculinity tend to promote unrealistic expectations and ideals that many men may not be able to match up to, and this can result in a great deal of mental anguish. When men are told that they must act or behave in a particular way that contradicts their nature or personal desires, a tendency towards overcompensation and masquerading develops, which in the long run, can result in a series of mental health issues such as anxiety and depression, amongst others. Furthermore, because of the notable influence NS has on Singapore and its identity, the cultures these institutions have normalized are capable of nurturing the attitudes and behaviours of the NS men, leading to the possibility of these attitudes and behaviours spilling over into their daily lives. These cultures can inform their perception of gender and sex, and can hence impact their views on women and result in them treating women in an inexcusable manner. In addition, as long as the characterization of women as being less capable of serving as front liners remains a dominant narrative, it will continue to be one of many inhibitions to gender equality in Singapore. Hence, these misogynistic perspectives need to be heavily questioned and problematized in order for us to move towards a society that is more equitable for both men and women.

When discussing harmful masculinity in the context of NS, we chose to focus on the use of misogynistic language for the reason that it occurs at all levels of the institutions’ hierarchy, as opposed to the other identified actions and behaviors which tend to occur in more personal and private group settings. Nonetheless, we should not invalidate the role these other actions and behaviors play in perpetuating harmful masculinity in NS institutions. These actions and behaviors include but are not limited to instances of locker room talk, the sharing and/or group consumption of pornographic material, catcalling, and male-on-male sexual harassment. Some of these stories were previously recounted in section III. Hence, to eliminate the prevalence of these harmful cultures in NS institutions, it is important to design a solution that can holistically address every single one of these manifestations of harmful masculinity. Some of these solutions will be further discussed in the following section.

V. What can we do?

A national study on masculinity

While there has been countless studies done on the barriers that women face in relation to gender equality, there is a paucity of research on men and masculinity in Singapore. Our own decision to carry out original research for this report was influenced by the lack of data in this area.

We urge the Government to fund / commission a national research on men and masculinity, to study the impact of masculinity norms on gender equality, violence against women, men’s health and well being. In this regard, we echo the call made by the Executive Director of AWARE, Corinna Lim, in her S R Nathan Lectures on Gender Equality.

Globally, men’s studies is a relatively new field, but we note that in the last few years, Governments, international NGOS and organisations like the UN, have now started to actively focus on men and masculinities. Below are some of the helpful studies that have been carried out, which may be referred to in conceptualising a study in Singapore’s context.

• In 2019, the UK Government carried out an in-depth study10 on how to engage with men and boys to address social norms connected to masculinity and challenge and change harmful gender stereotypes in the UK.

The final report titled “Changing Gender Norms: Engaging with Men and Boys” concluded that:

“the constraints imposed by masculine expectations have a harmful effect on men’s health and wellbeing, especially their mental health, contributing to high levels of depression and suicide among men.

This could include norms such as those encouraging risk-taking among men and boys and those discouraging men from sharing their emotions or asking for help. Masculine expectations can make it highly difficult for men to recognise and seek support when they are victims of violence and abuse. Gender norms also play a central role in violence against women and girls — especially norms of masculinity, with most violence and abuse being perpetrated by men.”

The Report also identified many opportunities for promoting more positive masculinities, from policy approaches, programmes to engage men and boys, workplace interventions, media representations.

• The International Men and Gender Equality Survey (IMAGES), one of the most comprehensive household studies ever carried out on men’s attitudes and practices on a wide variety of topics related to gender equality, have been carried out by NGO Promundo and the International Center for Research on Women (ICRW) in more than 27 countries around the world. This survey has informed national-level discussions and the development of new policies in Brazil, Chile, Croatia and across the Balkans.
• Four UN agencies — UNDP, UNFPA, UN Women and UNV — carried out the UN Multi-country Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific (2010 to 2013) to find out how masculinities relate to men’s perceptions and perpetration of gender-based violence.

This study conducted in 6 Asia Pacifc countries, including China and Indonesia (Singapore was not included) found that rape was commonly motivated by a sense of entitlement. The findings of this survey were used to develop strategies to prevent sexual assault and rape.

• THE MAN BOX: A Study on Being a Young Man in the US, UK, and Mexico (2017) by Promundo. Key findings included that respondents were particularly likely to have encountered messages related to men’s self-sufficiency, toughness, and hypersexuality.

Mental Health Services

Considering the social (and socialised) aspect of harmful masculinity norms, one direct solution to the issue would be addressing the ways in which such norms affect the psychological and emotional states of men. Over 70% of all suicides in Singapore were found to be males, a considerable majority which prompts reasonable suspicion surrounding the correlation between gender and mental illness. A study done by Prof Jane Pirkis and four other contributors aimed to research this topic in the context of Australia, examining “whether endorsement of dominant masculinity norms heightens the risk of or is protective against suicidal thinking.” With data collected from over 13,000 men, the results of the study concluded that “self-reliance”, a dominant norm of masculinity, was a pronounced risk factor for suicidal thinking amongst men.

As part of the multi-pronged solution to addressing harmful masculinity norms in Singapore, similar research could be undertaken in the setting of Singapore in order to illuminate the situation locally. This research could also then be used to plan mental health services, in terms of quantity and types of services that need be provided.

To ensure the efficacy of such mental health services, however, the stigma surrounding mental health and therapy needs to be solved concurrently; cultivating acceptance toward maintaining one’s mental health should start from the institutions with the largest reach to men in Singapore: schools and National Service (NS). Engaging these institutions through ministry-backed campaigns to encourage mental health, while providing accessible mental health services, such as therapy, to men in schools and NS, would acquaint men to the idea of addressing their own mental health, and possibly prompt them to continue seeking mental health help out of such institutions.

Changes to Sexuality Education programme

Addressing Pornography

Refusing to discuss sexually explicit media, which is more accessible to minors than at any other time in history, is highly problematic. An American study found that more than 90 percent of boys and close to two-thirds of girls had viewed online pornography before turning 18, whether intentionally or involuntarily.

The figures for Singapore are hard to find and this is already an issue because it is important to understand how many of our young teens are watching pornography. A 2015 survey by Touch Cyber Wellness showed that nine out of every 10 teenage boys between 13 and 15 years old watched or read sexually explicit materials in 2015. Of this, more than half of them intentionally sought it out. Some were exposed to it even before they started primary school.

Curiosity about sex and masturbation is natural. Many boys and girls who have yet to have a first kiss and yet, there is a high chance that they would have been exposed to adult porn. The free content most readily seen by minors shows sex as something men do to rather than with women. It often portrays female pleasure as a performance for male fantasies, shows wildly unrealistic scenarios, ignores consent and more worryingly sometimes flirts with the idea of rape and incest. According to the New York Times, a 2020 analysis of more than 4,000 heterosexual scenes on Pornhub and Xvideos, 45 percent and 35 percent, respectively, contained aggression, almost exclusively directed at women. Evidently, teenagers are being served an unhealthy diet of unhealthy sexual relations, violence, degradation, etc. Young boys watching this are sadly given the wrong impression that some of this behaviour is acceptable. This is incredibly worrying.

To address this gap of coverage, we recommend the following:

• Have a clear review of the SEd programme and make sure that it includes a comprehensive section on pornography
• Involve experts, members of the public, academics, politicians and even producers in the conversation to make sure that the programme is complete
• Implement the programme in stages and start early (the conversation may need to begin in P6 or Secondary 1)
• Conduct surveys to understand what young people are watching and what kind of pornography they are exposed to
• Design a proper counselling session for teenagers (especially young boys) so that they are able to discuss issues such as addiction, trauma, etc.

“Porn literacy” may sound scandalous, and it may certainly lead to some parents questioning the direction of the Ministry, but this literacy is so crucial if we want young men who are able to process what they see online and not translate that to their relationships. 81.7% of our respondents believe there should be an in-depth discussion about pornography in the SEd programme When literacy courses aimed at reducing teen use of tobacco, drugs and alcohol are done right, they can reduce risk, help assuage the worries that trouble teens, encourage them to follow better values and give them more control over their lives. Furthermore, such discussions may change the perception about the Ministry programme. Instead of being seen as tokenistic, they might be seen as a genuine desire to help teens navigate a difficult part of their lives. We believe our society will benefit greatly from this change.

Continuing Sexuality Education in polytechnics and ITEs

It is worrying enough that there are not any structured SEd programmes in Polytechnics and ITEs here. The proposal is very simple: have a mandatory programme to help young teens process the difficult changes that are happening in their lives.

MOE’s existing programme is already a good start, it just has to be made mandatory through polytechnics and ITEs. Since the scope in these institutions will be quite different from secondary schools and JCs, external partners should be considered to conduct such programmes. This might help polytechnic and ITE lecturers in relieving such a huge responsibility and hence ensure the sustainability and the proper conduct of such a programme.

Engaging parents to discuss masculinity norms

When parents try (or dare) to have conversations with their teens, it can be a very unnerving and difficult conversation. However, we have seen various instances where children, especially young male teens, need to have such discussions. It is important to understand that masculinity is natural, good, and necessary. Although it’s easier for some to name and focus on obvious manifestations of harmful masculinity such as sexual harassment, domestic violence, and bullying, it’s more difficult to take it a step further and discuss ill-timed and poorly-appropriated masculine behaviours.

It is important for any programmes to address this to make it clear that no one is championing men’s emasculation; rather, it is about developing men’s more humane side. It is about reconciling the fact that being a man is not only about leading, being aggressive, and dominating, but it is also about following, being passionate, and empowering. As such, there is a need for the conversation to go away from the gendered biases and more towards a fluid understanding of the roles of men and women in society.

Before starting any major initiative it is important to first begin with some introspection and self-reflection. There is a need for men from all walks of life to have a genuine, honest conversation about what being a man means. The conversation should make us realise that we have major biases that affect our relationships with one another.

Once that conversation is started, we have to then have a step-by-step programme that is created by mentors and society leaders, reaching out to families to have this discussion. This would be quite similar to the Birds & Bees programme conducted by AWARE, but is aimed at getting different groups in civil society to properly guide parents into having these discussions at home with their children. 93.9% of our respondents indicate they want these discussions to happen at home, showing a real need for parents to start these conversations, and a programme like this will give proper guidance to parents.

Review of National Service policies

Basic and vocational training and its impact on gender equality and harmful masculinity norms

Based on our survey responses and interviews, it is clear that the culture surrounding NS perpetuates misogyny and other harmful masculinity norms, especially during the basic and vocational training period. With the environment being male-dominated and valuing hyper-masculinity at a formative period where “boys become men”, harmful masculinity is normalised through the use of harmful and derogatory language aimed at women and sexual minorities.

When the training programs are structured in such a way that encourages this hypermasculinity, it is reflective of an inherent flaw in the system. The system has failed to safeguard the humanity of all individuals, to the extent that sexism and homophobia are not limited to just one or two personal recounts, but rather, are an entrenched culture. These institutionalized cultures are one of many contributions to gender disparity on a national scale. Therefore, a solution that is effective in dismantling the prevalence of these cultures needs to be introduced.

We hence urge the government to review the policies related to the basic and vocational training period, in pursuit of improving gender neutrality and curbing the prevalence of harmful masculinity norms.

In particular, we propose the introduction of a policy which disbands not just the use of misogynistic language through the command hierarchy, but any type of actions and verbalizations that are sexist and/or sexual in nature. Making this an official policy within the NS institutions would also mean that suitable punishment should be enforced if and when infractions occur. This policy should be further supported by continuous programmes and campaigns which encourage positive behaviour.

When asked to determine whether such policies could be effective in solving the issue at hand, Steve made a comparison to a policy which successfully curbed a different but equally relevant social issue within the NS institutions. As recounted, SCDF’s anti-ragging policies have been successful in controlling the ragging culture in many fire stations, which was a problem for many years. The policy is proactively imposed, through quarterly anti-ragging briefings and anti-ragging posters that are posted all around the stations and training academies. This has resulted in a culture where ragging is often spoken about in daily conversation, and people have become more cautious about refraining from behavior that would be defined as ragging.

However, Steve had the opinion that it was problematic that SCDF only started proactively eliminating the ragging culture after a ragging incident at Tuas View Fire Station resulted in the death of a firefighter in 2018. He said that these institutions should not wait for an incident to happen to take action, but rather, should take preventative measures from the very beginning. Likewise, SCDF and all other NS institutions should not be waiting for a serious case of sexual misconduct or sexism to occur to start taking action against it. NS institutions’ attitude towards sexual misconduct and sexism should be just as proactive as their attitude towards ragging. Steve’s recount of the anti-ragging policies being successful in curbing ragging in SCDF makes him believe that policies against sexual misconduct and sexism will provide just as much success.

Gender-neutral expansion of National Service to include other essential services

National Service in Singapore is an institution that strongly promotes a shared national identity and culture. Instead of perpetuating misogyny, homophobia, and harmful masculinity norms, it can be used to actively promote positive forms of masculinity and respectful norms of behaviour and equality among younger Singaporean men. In that light, we recommend that the Government consider expanding National Service beyond military and uniformed roles to include other essential services, and eventually make National Service gender neutral.

This would enable a wider scope of critical and essential services to be included under the umbrella of National Service, including community, healthcare, and social services in order to meet the demand of such services to our aging population, and require women to also serve National Service in both uniformed and non-uniformed roles.

Including women in National service gives everyone an equal opportunity and responsibility in serving the nation, and also allows everyone to foster a national identity together, one that would promote more respect and gender equality. In practical terms, as our population shrinks, the number of male conscripts are projected to decrease by a third by 2030, the necessity for women to serve may become inevitable, and by planning ahead with the right policy changes, transitioning to this new form of National Service may be made with less friction.

This is not a new idea. The first SR Nathan Fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, Mr Ho Kwon Ping, had previously suggested that we should take the first step in conscripting women to 5 months of service in healthcare and social care work, in anticipation that we would eventually require women to serve in military and uniformed roles. We believe this is a viable start to eventually make the full 2-year term of National Service in military, uniformed, and expanded roles available to all men and women of Singapore.

VI. Conclusion

Discussions on gender inequality have always been rightfully centred around women’s rights. However, when the discourse only focuses on the perspective of women, it is possible to lose sight of the role harmful masculinity norms play in perpetuating gender inequality. Hence, Singaporean men need to contribute to the conversation from their perspective, starting by recognising the harm that arises as a result of such norms.

Our analysis and proposals in this paper provide a starting point from which we can address harmful masculinity norms. We believe that this is the perfect time to start this conversation, so we can begin the work on creating a healthier form of masculinity that promotes a better quality of life for both men and women, and thus, brings us closer towards achieving gender equality. Beginning with a national study on masculinity is crucial in providing the data to start this process, and through further refinement and review of existing policies around our national institutions, we can start changing the culture in our society to better reflect Singapore’s values of justice and equality for all.

The Healthy Masculinity Project can be reached at healthymasculinityproject@gmail.com.