Minister of the Interior Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) said recently that sex trade workers could be allowed to work in “individual studios” of three to five workers not restricted to specific red light districts, although they should be kept out of residential districts or areas where schools, universities or places of worship are located. As we see it, the Ministry of the Interior’s proposal represents a practical approach to the problem, compared with simply restricting the sex industry to red light districts.
First of all, is it really the case that should the ministry’s goal of keeping the sex trade out of specific areas be adopted, that prostitution will crop up everywhere else around the city? Luxury apartment block tenants will occasionally call sex trade workers over to their homes for sex, but this kind of behavior does not necessarily disturb the neighbors and there are varying opinions as to the morality of this kind of thing.
The sex trade is fundamentally comprised of business transactions and it will tend to gravitate toward areas where there is a sufficient customer base and support network. By this we mean business districts where a lot of people come and go, neighborhoods which have developed into suitable locations for sex trade work for historical reasons, or places where there is a higher level of tolerance for such activities. It is not the case, then, that the entire country will become one big red light district.
Local residents are naturally going to have doubts and concerns about issues of law and order and personal safety if sex trade studios start cropping up in their neighborhoods. They will not want the studios to be overly conspicuous or visible. We need to find a way to make sure these concerns are addressed, tailored to individual localities.
The ministry’s solution of prohibiting such studios within residential areas is simply introducing rigid legislation from outside. It does not give any provision for self-regulation, such as relying on the work ethic of the sex trade workers themselves, or for local mechanisms to coordinate the situation.
Another issue is that many towns and cities in Taiwan are not strictly zoned: It is quite common for any given district to be both residential and commercial at the same time. This presents considerable problems for how this proposal could be policed. We feel that this is where the crux of the problem lies.
Many local community leaders have over the years adopted a flexible approach, accommodating residents while giving sex workers space to make a living. Many apartment blocks have their own rules and regulations to adhere to and these often deal with the issue as well. Examples like these, where a certain degree of mutual respect is adopted, are the way to go. The Order Maintenance Act (社會秩序維護法) contains a number of clauses related to public order, so that when the police receive a complaint they will be able to investigate and uphold the law, ensuring that local residents’ rights can be guaranteed, and giving both parties room to provide their own account.
The relationship between sex trade workers and the community is not a zero-sum game: It is not the case that one side necessarily has to gain at the expense of the other. If prostitution is legalized, sex trade workers will have an incentive to form workers’ organizations and regulate themselves. With the assistance and coordinated effort of apartment committees, community leaders and even the police, it might be possible to both work for the public good as well as to advance sex workers’ rights.
Chung Chun-chu is the chief executive officer of the Collective of Sex Workers and Supporters (COSWAS). Wu Jo-ying is a secretary at COSWAS.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with