In September last year a series of nude photographs taken by members of a Web site in a Taipei MRT station began circulating on the Internet. Police arrested the owner of the site and four others — including a woman — on charges of offenses against sexual morality.
However, the Shilin District Prosecutors’ Office last week dropped the charges on the grounds that the images did not contain scenes of sexual abuse or acts of bestiality, and were only available to members of the site.
The prosecutors said that society “is not so conservative,” and that “nudity alone does not constitute an offense.”
However, what should be at issue in the case was not whether offenses were committed against sexual morality — through the dissemination of obscene material — but the question of sexual discrimination, namely: the objectification of women’s bodies as sexual objects.
The Web site was set up to facilitate the exchange of nude photographs of women. The site’s rules say that its “large network of members” must upload nude images of their wives or girlfriends taken in public for other members’ enjoyment. Those who do not wish to provide nude pictures can pay an annual subscription fee of NT$4,200 to become “fans.”
Perhaps some of the site’s members are women and perhaps some women have uploaded nude photographs. The site certainly gives the appearance of being a networking site for like-minded men and women to express their private sexual preferences through the voluntary exchange of photos.
However, is not the swapping of photos of women as a form of interaction between like-minded individuals in fact permitting men to use women’s bodies as their own property while objectifying and sexualizing women?
Even if the women in question are aware of the purpose behind the pictures and are aware of the site’s rules — and even if they are motivated by a desire to show off their bodies or a need to feel liberated — is using this space not just for the benefit of voyeuristic men?
There might be people who would argue that the site’s rules could be used to satisfy the needs of lesbians and therefore dismiss criticisms of the operation.
However, those who hold such a view should take a serious look at the attitudes of the site’s owners and its members.
Perhaps there are people who say that if nude photos of men were also objects for exchange — giving the appearance of equal treatment — discrimination against women would be avoided. However, would that really be true?
The case of the Ashley Madison Web hack provides a perfect example for comparison with the Taipei case. The Ashley Madison Web site was attacked by computer hackers, which resulted in a large quantity of personal user information being leaked online and led to a class-action lawsuit against the company.
Ashley Madison’s motto: “Life’s short, have an affair” appears at face value to be extremely egalitarian: There are no limits placed upon gender. However, on closer inspection it is clear that the raison d’etre of the site is actually to service men’s desires.
The vast majority of Ashley Madison’s nearly 400 million users are men. Not only is the proportion of female users small, many are fake profiles, or “zombie” accounts.
What is interesting is that although it is free to register an account, if men want to send or receive messages from female users, they must pay a fee. This is an important source of revenue for the company. However, for women there is no fee.
This is a commonly seen marketing ploy that is not used out of consideration for the site’s female users, but is aimed at its many male users to extract money from them.
Ashley Madison also employs other methods that prove that the company exists purely to provide services to men through the discrimination of women. For example, the company uses all sorts of photos of women who depart from what most men who seek out such sites might consider “beautiful” — such as women who are extremely obese or whose demeanor appears stupid.
The motivation is not to drum up support for such women and help them in their quest for sexual freedom, but rather to signal to men that they do not need to put up with their “ugly” wives and thus sow a seed in their minds that having an affair is an entirely reasonable thing to do.
Media reports have said that Ashley Madison was developing an app called “Rate your wife,” which would allow users to upload a picture of their wives for other men to appraise and even competitively bid for.
From nude photo shoots to extramarital affair Web sites, it only appears that women have gained control over their bodies. In reality, the female body has been turned into an object over which men perceive to exert sexual power.
While it is true that “Taiwan is not that conservative,” the nation is still very much a patriarchal society. The prosecutors’ decision to throw out the case in Taipei means that people cannot use morality to control women’s bodies, but what has not changed is the sexual power of men and sexual rights.
A sexual liberation that talks only of freedom, while ignoring the issue of discrimination, will only allow men to become even more emboldened in their pursuits.
Lee Chia-wen is a law professor at National Cheng Kung University. Chen Chao-ju is a law professor at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Edward Jones
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations