“July 28th, 2009 at 1:18 pm – Edit

Is Thio’s doctorate for real? Is that indicative of the level of intellectual rigour of whatever university it was she attended?”

…not so much the university she attended, but the local culture of Singapore. Haven’t you heard?…Singapore, 1st world country, 3rd world mentality. Not everyone, but definite majority. Don’t be fooled by the exterior of Singapore. Spend some time here and you’ll know what I mean.

Is Thio’s doctorate for real? Is that indicative of the level of intellectual rigour of whatever university it was she attended?

I love how this is turning out. These “intelligent” bigots just end up tripping over themselves in public eventually.

a. does not believe in human rights
b. discriminates against LGBT students in violation of a university’s code of conduct

is qualified to teach a course on human rights at that university.

The crucial piece on the substance to me is the difference between threatening violence (throwing people in jail is pretty violent) against those you disagree with and yelling at people you disagree with. Someone who simply yells, insults and boycotts those who threaten to throw you in jail is showing incredible restraint.

I have mixed feelings about this. I didn’t want tla to have NYU in her portfolio. At the same time, it would have done her good to be there. In Singapore, she is a member of the English-educated right wing christian literati. She is not used to rebuttal and disagreement. Usually, she makes statements and people are silenced because of her status and position in society. Obviously she has no courage to face the challenge to her prejudiced and bigoted views.

It is really embarrassing that a supposedly qualified legal lecturer from the island of Singapore has that kind of response to mere disagreement with and rebuttal to statements she made. Says alot about the qualities and caliber of the academia in Singapore. It is obvious she has had no practice in legal and logical argument and her deep-seated prejudices are religious and cultural in nature.

It is also telling of her mindset that instead of engaging in what might have been an interesting and lively student-faculty debate, she chose to write a letter of complaint to the faculty and dean. That unfortunately is how the patriachal system of which is she an active member works. Students of NYU are right in deciding that she would not be able to contribute a qualified and dignified higher education in her time there.

Well, unfortunately she is back on this island and she is our problem. We did after all create the environment in which someone like her thrived and received support for her ideas.

Warwick University from the UK rejected a place in Singapore because of they feared they would not be able to discuss openly sensitive issues like homosexuality here. Other than Malaysia and countries in Africa, we are one of the few ex-British colonies that have retained the anti-sodomy law for homosexuals. The same law was repealed for heterosexual sex in 2007. Even China is more open than we are. And now we have an anti-gay rights activist rejected by NYU. As a Singaporean, I have no idea where to ‘put my face’.

Be kind. We are not all like that. We are trying to make changes too.

As for the death threats, I bet my last dollar that she made it up…an excuse to justify a quick exit.

I’ve been to NYC twice and I really liked it. I now love it and am so grateful for NYU students having voted with their feet and forcing Ms Thio to show, by her no show, what she really is, a coward for not daring to face an audience willing and able to show her up as a bigoted fraud.

“In Singapore, people do not really care whether someone is homosexual or not, as we tend to look at the merit of a person, for example, in the workplace.”

REALLY, professor thio?

i happen to know, FOR A FACT, that the ministry of education is actively screening out teachers who are gay. of course, they would deny this when confronted with it. and when we declare our sexual orientation in the military (compulsory, not voluntary), our vocations are immediately changed to a much less “sensitive” one.

i would be really at all ears to hear her arguement about sexual inequality that still very much exists in our so-termed “conservative asian society”