It’s often hard to feel sorry for politicians because one day’s victim can turn around and be equally offensive to someone else the next. However, it has to be acknowledged that female politicians the world over have a tougher time than their male counterparts.
If they are not married, their sexual preferences are queried or they are ridiculed for not being able to find a partner. Married or not — and with or without children — their maternal instincts are mocked, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, among others, can attest. Either way, they are challenged as men rarely are for putting their career over or before a partner and family.
The recent smear campaign — that is the only way to describe it — launched by one-time democracy activist and darling of the international human rights world turned publicity hound Shih Ming-teh (施明德) against Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential hopeful Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) shows that even a man who spent more than 25 years in prison for his political beliefs can be just as misogynistic as the average male chauvinist.
On April 14, while making a plug for Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良), one of Tsai’s rivals for the DPP presidential nomination process, Shih said Tsai should “clarify” her sexual orientation because voters “deserved a clear answer” before deciding on a candidate.
Earlier in the day he had attacked the third DPP hopeful, Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌), not by questioning his sexual preferences, but over his democratic credentials. Neither Su nor Tsai had played a key role in Taiwan’s democracy movement in the 1970s and 1980s, Shih said, adding that not a “single one” of the key democratic trailblazers like himself had gone on to high-level government roles.
If a trailblazer is defined, as Shih appeared to be doing, as someone who was imprisoned for his or her political activism, then once again his misogyny was shining through by ignoring former vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) or Greater Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) — his co-defendants in the Kaohsiung Incident trial.
Lu and Chen have certainly blazed trails — and they have battled critics questioning their unmarried state along the way.
Lu was frequently mocked during her years as a legislator over her marital status, not to mention the nationwide snickering that ensued in December 2001 when another publicity hound, Tung Nien-tai (董念台), dressed in a flashy tuxedo and armed with a huge bouquet of roses, attempted to lead a 24-car motorcade to the Presidential Office to propose to then-vice president Lu. Stopped by police, Tung first accused Lu of not having the decency to refuse him to his face, then said she was “not good enough” to marry him. Two months later, another alleged suitor spent a fortune to erect a large billboard along a Changhua County highway declaring his love for Lu.
Far too many people thought it was okay for these two men to try and humiliate Lu because she was in her late 50s and not married. Was she supposed to be gratified that any man thought of marrying her?
Misogyny is no laughing matter, and neither is Shih’s attempt to smear Tsai. It seems unlikely Shih would really want to see his suggestion carried out equally — to say that any man running for office must “clarify” his sexuality or that married politicians must “clarify” if they have mistresses or lovers or if they beat their wives/husbands/partners or children.
However, this is not really a question of sexual identity or gay rights as much as it is yet another attempt to denigrate and sideline a female politician with a sexually based offensive. And it is disheartening to be reminded that someone who once fought so hard for democracy remains so anachronistic in his thinking.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS