Fridae

@16 : I did not know that! But then it sounds like that was a teachable moment for the Singapore government. :) @17: There would probably be rather few consequences. There are already groups like Young OUT Here which are open to queer youth. Informal groups have existed before in several polytechnics and faculties. I also mentioned NUS's emerging discussion group, the Gender Collective. The main consequence, of course, is that queer youth in the university would be more assured that the campus would be a safe space to come out, and that straight youth would become familiar with the idea of out queers forming part of society. Queer university groups CAN be hotbeds of activism - but whether they're effective or not remains to be seen.

@5: I'd heard reports from friends who watched on nights before I did, and from the performers themselves about the walkouts. I did see people milling about on the night of the show, but I couldn't be sure why - it might have just been because they were going to the toilet.

Ashley is hot babie.

@15, back to the article, Yi-Sheng, what consequences, if any, would there be if students formed a gaysoc at your university?

@14, I understand the deal breaker for Warwick University was that they were told that students would not be allowed to have a gaysoc ( gay society), and this was too much of an infringement. Whether this concern has been addressed regarding Yale-NUS is an interesting question.

@5, maybe it was the points at which they walked out that was the giveaway, as the article suggests.

A question for Ng Yi-Sheng. I spoke to some close friends,both gay & straight in Sg this weekend about your article.They are all very well cultured and worldly wise.The general consensus as to why some members of the audience walked out was not so much the gay themes or adult language used (which anyone who purchased tickets beforehand would know A Chorus Line is not a Disney production) but rather the production itself which they claim was amateur,poorly staged and not even close to the original in terms of quality.Did you ask any of the audience who left what was the reason or just assumed it was for the gayness or frankness of the show?

@fountainhall : I know the word "queer" has really negative connotations for some people in Western English-speaking societies. But it doesn't for most younger people, and it doesn't at all in Asia. I like the word "queer" for several reasons: 1) Unlike the term "gay", it clearly includes lesbian, transgender and bisexual people. Some of my friends, e.g. Brian, actual prefer the term to describe themselves! 2) Because of its use in certain academic and activist circles, it's taken on political connotations - saying you're gay or trans is just about sexual attraction and gender; saying you're queer suggests that you care about equality. 3) It is *so* much easier to say out loud than the politically correct LGBT (or LGBTQ2SI, if you want to be really inclusive). I suspect that won't convince you, so we'll probably have to agree to disagree.

@Tim1975: Yeah, no news. The judges are sitting on it. Grrrr.

The real question of this article and situation isn't if the new university or other universities "are gay friendly" it is are they going to be "gay protective". If as stated at the begining of the article being gay is illegal will the new university stand up for their students' or faculties' rights if it comes in conflict with the government? If the government decides for some reason to come on campus and start asking about people's names and orientations what will be the campus' official and unofficial stance?? Seeing other articles on the news about how universities in singapore have dealt with speech issues doesn't give me hope, but maybe Yale will have an influence.

It's an interesting dichotomy. Does a university that values freedom of association refuse to go along with legal sanctions against gay people and gay groups, and pull out, as Warwick University did, or does it engage constructively like Yale, in the hope that such such sanctions will not be applied, and that they can help improve things? I believe that the removal of 377a and of the refusal to register groups like PLU ( and why are any groups required to register in the first place?), would do a lot towards smoothing the path of such collaborations.

Hai Joseph. If You ever remember me - i wrote to you previously. More than a year ago on April,. I have a bad news. I wish I can get in contact with you again. I have to talk to you. Thank You Johnben

Hai Joseph. If You ever remember me - i wrote to you previously. More than a year ago on April,. I have a bad news. I wish I can get in contact with you again. I have to talk to you. Thank You Johnben

By the way, now 8 months since the hearing on 377a last September, still no news?

Charming article. Shame about the closed minds walking out. But if you want to see examples of the ignorance and homophobia of the religious right in Singapore, look at the comments following the following articles on gay marriage: http://theonlinecitizen.com/2012/05/open-letter-to-sts-andy-ho/

Singapore audiences walking out of Chorus Line??My God are they living in the 21st Century or 18th Century.My heart goes out to all the gay men and woman living in Singapore as well as the cast members of this landmark Broadway show.How sad to read this.

Yi-Sheng - I have enjoyed reading your article. But why do you continue to use the word "queer"? What is "queer" about being a member of the LGBT community? Frankly, there is nothing "queer" about us at all. The only "queer" issue is that "queer" in this day and age it is a highly disparaging word to use. Do not demean our community. Please treat us - and yourself - with greater respect. Thank you.

i am an engineer and i fully understand why engineering students are more homophobic. Engineering is a very male centric faculty. we deal with hard facts, calculations, science. everything we learnt are fixed. rules can't be changed as formulas are determined by research and confirmed. with so many males in engineering, it is inevitable that there is a sense of macho-ness. just stepped into engineering faculty and you will see a drastic difference between the students and those from the arts stream. arts students are more at ease with themselves. they tend to express themselves readily not only in their works, but also in their dressings and communication. I took some arts and business modules while in NUS and we were taught to write whatever we think is right, as long as we can justify the reasons. Everything is grey in this sense. for engineering, there will only be one right answer to questions. it is no wonder that engineers tend to be more insistent on their views and cannot accept deviant views. once a homophobic engineer determines that it is wrong to be gay by order from god, you will find it very difficult to change his/her perception.

True that! But I did speak to one transgender researcher who works in a university - he said there's so little social interaction in his workplace that they don't even care about his sexual identity!

@ ddw_music: its no surprise to me that engineering students have a much higher level of intolerance towards gays. Unlike those in the humanities and social sciences, engineering students absorb knowledge that deals more with technicalities and the hard sciences. This reduces their ability to analyse things critically and thus makes them less "soft" than their counterparts in the arts faculty. Also, i suspect that due to their seemingly heavy and tedious workload, engineering students hardly have a life like arts students do. Hence, less exposure to the outside world and a much more myopic perception of gays.