You see, Dr. Thio is also a member of Parliament in her home country, where they were recently considering whether to repeal the criminalization of homosexual sex. Dr. Thio gave a speech arguing against the repeal, raising more than eyebrows among concerned members of the NYU community. These are the sorts of people who would not be swayed by such rhetorical flourishes like "a human wrong cannot be a human right" and that "diversity is not a license to perversity".
You can imagine the reaction. First a letter informing the students of the existence of the video, and soon followed by petitions and calls for her ouster. In the face of this stiff opposition, NYU made the tough decision to stand behind the principle of academic freedom and not remove the appointment. They stated that they were unaware of the speech and that such views had not appeared in her legal writings. They pointed out that while regrettable, this did not affect her ability to teach or her scholarship, the basis on which the appointment was made.
This led to an uncomfortable few weeks as the situation remained at an impasse. Dr. Thio made a sharp rebuttal to her critics, which spurred further protests. And when it came time for students to select classes, a grand total of five students decided to sign up for her seminar on, I kid you not, "Human Rights in Asia." Today though, we have a resolution to this ordeal: Dr. Thio has canceled her visit to NYU for the fall semester.
I have mixed feelings about the way the situation was handled, though I'm more disappointed than anything. Let me explain. On the one hand, I am firmly against her position on homosexual relations, but then I have to square this with the fact that I am coming from a perspective and experience that's much different from that of Singapore. Gay rights have advanced greatly here, but there is a greater resistance elsewhere, so it should come as no surprise that there are more people that hold these views. The state of the discussion in Singapore is far behind that in the US, considering the nature of the proceedings (the mere decriminalization of homosexual relations). It should also be considered that Dr. Thio's role as an MP is also different from that as a scholar, and one should not have bearing on the other in this case.
However, I am proud of NYU for sticking out in support of academic freedom. They realize that in our scholarly pursuits we must look to arguments from all sides, and not restrict the communication of ideas, even if we do not personally agree with them. That's why it disappoints me when strong-arm tactics are used by others to totally suppress others' views. By merely shouting down the other side instead of engaging, the only thing that is accomplished is spreading bitterness among both sides. I also find that it shows a lack of faith in one's own arguments if you have to resort to such drastic means. And the hypocrisy is stunning: how many times have the left denigrated conservatives for side-stepping debate and resorting to name-calling? We can't be selective in this principle--it is the definition of liberalism.
The students though should be applauded for partially making the right move. The lack of interest in the class is the most effective action that can be taken, and may be the most damning of Prof. Thio's views. This "voting with your feet" should be commended, and should be the route that is pursued in the future.
In the end, NYU loses out on an attempt to provide at least a little balance to their pretty strict liberal professorship. Admittedly, it would be somewhat interesting to hear a seminar on human rights who isn't a particular fan of the subject. But hey, I'd rather take Environmental Law with the Dean.
1 comment:
Hold the phone, here's an update on what we thought was a closed matter:
From an e-mail by the NYU ACLU board
"Although Dr. Thio has cancelled her visit to the Law School, her
appointment remains a very serious issue for many in the Law School
community. We were gratified to learn that the Law School had agreed to
host a town hall meeting to discuss the appointment. We think it important
that the meeting still occur. . . . We also write to echo OUTLaw’s grave concerns about Dr. Thio’s
appointment, and to join OUTLaw and other student groups in condemning Dr.
Thio’s reprehensible statements about the gay community. We call on the Law
School to condemn in the strongest terms possible Dr. Thio’s statements and
actions supporting state-sponsored oppression as antithetical to the values
of the New York University School of Law, something the Law School has not
yet done. We do not believe that the Law School would compromise its
commitment to academic freedom by making such a statement. . . ."
Post a Comment