An article by correspondent Emily Rauhala in the Washington Post (“A backlash against same-sex marriage tests Taiwan’s reputation for gay rights,” April 20) caught my attention, as it addressed the ongoing same-sex marriage debate in Taiwan and the counter-push by certain conservative Christian groups in Taiwan against equal marriage rights.
Having lived in Taiwan for five years now and writing my MA thesis on the topic of homoeroticism in traditional Chinese history, culture and literature at National Taiwan University (NTU), I have a few relevant thoughts to add to this discussion, which may provide a more accurate socio-cultural context in which to examine this contentious topic.
The article quotes Minister of Justice Chiu Tai-san (邱太三), who argued that same-sex relationships are a “newly invented phenomenon” unlike “social norms and mechanisms formed by the people of our nation over the past 1,000 years,” and that same-sex marriages would create problems as related to elements of ancestor worship.
Others who oppose same-sex marriage agree, believing that same-sex love and marriage are a Western invention, and not part of traditional Chinese and Taiwanese culture.
Sadly, the opposition could not be more wrong. They are not only on the wrong side of history on this issue, but have a clear lack of understanding of their own “traditional culture” when it comes to same-sex relationships.
The phenomenon of same-sex relationships in Chinese culture and history actually goes back much further than just the “past thousand years,” appearing at least as far back as the Book of Songs (詩經), written between the 11th and the seventh century BC. It is a phenomenon that is pervasive throughout all of the dynastic histories and popular literature.
The tradition of same-sex love, or “homoeroticism” (男色) as it was more commonly known, can be seen in a multitude of deeply revered Chinese literary and historical works, from the Biographies of the Emperors’ Male Favorites (佞幸列傳) in the Records of the Historian (史記) and A New Account of Tales of the World (世說新語) to Cao Xueqin’s (曹雪芹) masterpiece Dream of the Red Chamber (紅樓夢), to name just a few out of many hundreds of well-known examples.
Well-known expressions such as “cut sleeve” (斷袖), “half-eaten peach” (餘桃) and the “passion of Lord Longyang” (龍陽之情) clearly prove that same-sex love and homoeroticism have played an important part in Chinese culture.
In fact, it was with the arrival of the Western missionaries that the acceptance — and celebration — of homoeroticism changed.
Westerners did not, as anti-same-sex marriage campaigners believe, bring the concept of same-sex love to Asia, but rather the opposite: Using a contorted view of Judeo-Christian moral standards, they sought to diminish and erase an illustrious and unique Chinese tradition spanning thousands of years.
There are even stories of actual same-sex marriage in China’s Fujian Province — where most Taiwanese trace back to — as far back as the Ming and Qing Dynasties, such as in the story A male Mencius’s mother raises her son properly by moving house three times (男孟母教合三遷) by the great author Li Yu (李漁).
With such a well-documented tradition, people who oppose same-sex relationships — and marriage — on grounds of “tradition” or “conservative values” clearly lack a well-rounded knowledge of the traditions, customs and culture of which they speak. They might want to consult a copy of my master’s thesis or any number of other well-researched books and academic articles that discuss this topic at much greater length.
With this knowledge they would need to find another excuse for their prejudiced and uninformed positions.
Finally, the Washington Post article also mentions protesters in support of same-sex marriage praying to the goddess Matsu (媽祖) to help them achieve success in legalizing same-sex marriage in Taiwan.
However, there is actually already a guardian deity for LGBT people: Hu Tianbao (胡天保), who even happens to have a temple in his honor in Taipei’s Yonghe District (永和).
Perhaps he would be the more appropriate deity to pray to, and I will proudly stand with my LGBT brothers and sisters in Taiwan to do so.
David Evseeff works as a translator and interpreter in the US and holds an MA in Chinese Literature from National Taiwan University.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers