A chance to change
With the rising awareness of the importance of gender education, my colleagues in Yilan Senior High school last month launched a Facebook campaign “For homosexuality education” (我支持認識同志教育), to publicly state our position in support of teaching students to understand homosexuality more.
Its initial intention is to support the Luodong Senior High School counseling director whose method of introducing homosexual groups to 10th graders has provoked parental objections.
As more teachers from different schools have been joining the activity, the campaign has earned acclaim, but also incurred criticism.
On Thursday last week, Facebook page “Alliance of crying for hope” (搶救台灣希望聯盟) shared photographs with teachers in favor of homosexuality education, adding that it was time for parents to “take action” since those teachers have been “imposing” homosexuality education on students.
Teachers’ photographs have been swarmed with comments from opponents and supporters. On the surface, the teachers have become the object of attack, yet the page has more attention than before.
Apart from the fundamental misunderstandings of homosexuality and sex education, the phenomenon also exposes the underlying tension between parents and teachers over the “responsibility” and the “qualification” of teaching.
Undoubtedly parents and teachers own the responsibility to educate.
However, antagonism appears and deepens whenever either side seeks to dominate or influence students. When it comes to qualification, in this case, a teacher’s understanding of sex education collides with parents’ moral perspectives.
Some doubt that school teachers are professional enough with regard to gender issues and that teachers should not promote sexuality. Some suppose parents hold conventional views and that their ideas are no longer suitable for the changing society.
Teachers and parents share the same anxiety, and it would not be wise to prove who is more responsible or eligible to teach, nor should they suppose it is none of their business.
Rather, the two sides should recognize themselves as equally important to establish a society in which our children are prepared to love, live and work for the rest of their lives. In this respect, teachers and parents should be humble and willing to help each other expand their knowledge of gender issues.
As a supporter of one of the teachers, I do not think of myself as a role model or position myself as an authority. My message is simple: Since gender discrimination causes harm and takes place in classrooms and society, why not give ourselves the opportunity to face it and change it?
New Taipei City
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Lin Wei-chou (林為洲) talked about “opposing the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]” in a recent Facebook post, writing that opposing the CCP is not the special reserve of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Not long after, many people within the KMT received a mysterious letter signed “Chinese Nationalist Party Central Committee” containing what looked like a declaration of opposition to, and a call to arms against, the CCP. Unexpectedly, the KMT’s Culture and Communications Committee came forward with a clarification, saying that the letter was not sent by the KMT and telling the public not to believe
Australia’s decades-long battle to acquire a new French-designed attack submarine to replace its aging Collins class fleet bears all the hallmarks of a bureaucratic boondoggle. The Attack-class submarine project, initially estimated to cost A$20 billion to A$25 billion (US$15.6 billion to US$19.5 billion at the current exchange rate), had by 2016 doubled to A$50 billion, and almost doubled again to A$90 billion by February last year. Because of delays, the French-led Naval Group consortium would not begin cutting steel on the first submarine until 2024, which means the first vessel would not be operational until after 2030 — and the last
When Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called for a reset of bilateral relations with the US, a White House spokesperson replied that Washington saw the relationship as one of strong competition that required a position of strength. It is clear that US President Joe Biden’s administration is not simply reversing former US Donald Trump’s policies. Citing Thucydides’ attribution of the Peloponnesian War to Sparta’s fear of a rising Athens, some analysts believe the US-China relationship is entering a period of conflict pitting an established hegemon against an increasingly powerful challenger. I am not that pessimistic. In my view, economic
If the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was looking for some respite after the battering former US president Donald Trump gave it, it has been swiftly refused that hope. US President Joe Biden and his administration are making it clear that there is little chance of a return to the “strategic patience” of former US president Barack Obama’s era. In terms of the US’ approach to Beijing’s relations with Taipei, there has been a continuation of the selective strategic clarity the Trump administration favored over the “strategic ambiguity” of previous US administrations. One indication of this occurred during a virtual event on