Playing the victim card, and a suggestion for NYU
Monday, July 20, 2009 at 11:28AM The recent back-and-forth between students of NYU and Dr Thio Li-ann over her visiting professorship to teach human rights has shed more light into the tactics and mentality of our local legal scholar than that of the NYU students. One of the most illuminating exchanges was between Malik Graves-Pryor, an information technology professional who works for NYU law, whose letter to the NYU Law dean sparked an 18-point rebuttal from Dr Thio.
When I say "rebuttal" I mean writing a meandering accusation filled with anecdotes that accuse the LGBT community and those who stand with that community as having a "gay agenda" and trying to censor her views, and in the name of academic freedom and diversity the NYU students should not be this unfriendly to a visiting professor. In other words, "stop bullying me for my beliefs".
From my perspective, that response is not only laughable, but also lamentable. "You cannot have your cake and eat it" comes readily to mind; one cannot hide behind "academic freedom" and "diversity of viewpoints" without being accepting of actually free and diverse views that differ. You can only have a truly intellectual discussion if you are open to opinions that are different, or even diametrically opposite, of the ones you hold.
I am not talking about accepting those views. Some gaps cannot be bridged, and with subjects like these, it may never be bridged. But you cannot claim to be capable of an open, intellectual discussion without entertaining thoughts that you will not or cannot accept. And that is not the impression I get from her 18-wheeler opinion of "homosexuals are sub-human" diatribe. The NYU students are also expressing their academic freedom in voicing their own diverse views, and her response seems to indicate that she does not support that freedom if it targets her.
When you are in a position of authority, be it in government, academic, or corporate circles, you don't get to play the victim card and get away with it. Yes, she is not in government, since as an NMP her influence is limited, but she is a professor at NUS, and will be teaching at NYU. That, whether she likes it or not, is a position of influence and authority. Playing victim under such circumstances does not play out well, and does not staunch conviction in her beliefs despite her very vocal public advocacy for the continued retention of laws that criminalise gay men.
Much like Mr Graves-Pryor, I believe that equality for all is a fundamental human right. And to invite someone who does not believe unequivocally in equal rights for all humans, to teach a subject on human rights, is incongruent at best, and insidious at worst; and hiding behind that veneer of academic freedom and diversity of views will not be an acceptable excuse for both NYU and Dr Thio.
While we're at it, might I suggest to NYU to invite Pat Buchanan to speak on racism, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak on the Holocaust. While Dr Thio is nowhere near the contemptible personalities of Buchanan and Ahmadinejad, both of whom makes her look like Mary Poppins, it certainly fits NYU's philosophy.
Callan Tham
I just read this post by @gssq, and while I understand and agree with several of his points, I find his statement saying 'homosexuality does not harm anyone', and pointing out that 'incest does not harm anyone either, yet it is pretty uncontroversial to disapprove of and even criminalise it' very disturbing. To be precise, we are talking about criminalising gay men who practice consensual anal sex; that is very different from the perception of incest itself, where the perception is that of non-consensual sex that does cause psychological trauma.
To equate two very distinct sets of behaviour in this case is either missing the context, or a straw man. If I am missing important information about incest, feel free to drop a comment or an email via the Contact form.
Callan Tham
The New Paper reported that Dr Thio's classes are undersubscribed after one round of bids; NYU is, naturally, pulling a Rumsfeld on this. The report also stated that she was scheduled to teach Human Rights in Asia, and Constitutionalism in Asia. I have stated on Twitter that I do not object to her teaching constitutional law, only human rights, and I stand by that statement. While I hold no sway over any NYU student or staff, a boycott of her classes in the former is a step I would back.
Callan Tham
Apparently she is not going to teach a NYU after all. I have a new blog post up here as a response.
Dr Thio Li-ann, Malik Graves-Pryor, NYU in Civil rights, LGBT, Law, Religion, Singapore, United States 
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (2)
First of all, i think your blog has a nice layout - and I love that last part where you have a nice column for references.
I understand where & what you stand for on this matter; I'm not sure if its loud enough to be heard or be washed away like the rest for having or following or under the influence of the gay agenda.
Let's keep drumming up the voices then.
Thanks for the comment Hisham :) Personally I think phrases like "gay agenda" serve only one purpose: to propagate fear into the ignorant. It is an indictment against our society that fear-mongering tactics still work. To overcome this, we need more people not from the LGBT community to speak up against it.
So yes, let's keep drumming up the voices, and never stop speaking up until this social injustice is as unacceptable as prejudices against women and minorities are today.