The legislature on Oct. 24 held a public hearing on a draft amendment to the Enforcement Rules for the Gender Equity Education Act (性別平等教育法施行細則), and the discussion on how to provide adequate gender equity education to students of all ages made me recall the era before such education.
As a 34-year-old man, I was born in the same year as “Rose Boy” Yeh Yung-chih (葉永鋕), a junior-high student who had been constantly bullied by schoolmates due to his effeminate behavior before he mysteriously died in 2000.
During my junior-high years, LGBT-related information was not available at school, while the rigid and intimidating affective education was all about opposite-sex relationships. In the heterosexual-dominated educational setting of the time, I only knew the word “gay” as a word used to smear others, but did not know what it meant.
Even so, when I had a crush on someone at school for the first time, I could clearly sense that I was a boy who likes boys.
However, this pure affection gradually forced me to face my fears and concerns, which were certainly not caused by my sexual orientation. Rather, they were caused by an inability to find an existence that fit me in the textbooks. Due to the lack of gender equity education, I could not see a possible future in class or at school for me.
When I first received gender equity education years later, I could not help but wonder: Would I be living a happier life if schools had provided “courses on affective education, sex education, different gender, gender characteristics, gender temperaments, gender identity and sexual orientation,” as stated in Article 13 of the enforcement rules? If they had, would those LGBT people who suffer greater fears and concerns than me live more like ordinary people?
According to a survey on sexual violence against LGBT people by the Garden of Hope Foundation, more than 40 percent of LGBT respondents had experienced sexual assault, most frequently in the form of violence and bullying on campus.
Given this problem, the Ministry of Education’s draft amendment to the enforcement rules precisely highlights the areas in which the law should be urgently put into practice.
By clearly defining the coverage of gender equity education, the proposed amendment could reduce the distortion of the enforcement rules caused by rumors, parental concerns and ambiguous gender equity education.
At the same time, it would carry out the intent of the law as defined in Article 1 of the Gender Equity Education Act (性別平等教育法): “This act has been formulated in order to advance genuine gender equality, eliminate gender discrimination, safeguard human dignity, and soundly establish education resources and environments that epitomize gender equality.”
For the sake of protecting the human dignity of every child, everyone should be given a correct understanding of the issue from childhood to gradually eliminate gender discrimination, and learn how to embrace themselves and respect and empathize with people’s differences.
By doing so, when children are hurt by the outside world because their gender temperaments and personal behavior do not comply with the stereotyped gender framework, we can catch them when they fall and say: “You did nothing wrong — it is those who hurt you who are wrong.”
We should tell them to be who they are, that we will always be there for them, that they will grow up and that people will love them, because they deserve to be loved.
Chang Ming-hsu is a project manager at the Gender Equity Education Coalition.
Translated by Eddy Chang
For China observers, especially those in Taiwan, the past decade has brought awareness of an increasing obsession by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) with control. It seeks to control not simply national policy, but all aspects of its citizens’ lives. Not a week passes without some new aspect of Chinese life being brought under CCP control. This forces obvious questions: Why this obsession? And what is driving it? When any one-party state, which already controls government, yet seeks to expand and tighten that control, it bodes ill. With a country the size of China, it bodes ill for Taiwan, Asia and the
Taiwan is now entering a period of maximum danger from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) due to an accelerating Chinese military challenge now emboldened by a shocking dive in American strategic credibility occasioned by its humiliating withdrawal from Afghanistan. This means there is a much higher chance that in the next one to three years CCP leader Xi Jinping (習近平) may order the PLA to invade Taiwan because he believes the PLA can win and that the Americans can be dissuaded from coming to Taiwan’s aid in time. It is still possible for Taiwan and Washington
Another year, and another UN General Assembly is convening without Taiwan. Today marks the opening of the assembly’s 76th session at the UN headquarters in New York City, with the option to attend remotely because of the COVID-19 pandemic, which once again promises to be its main focus under the theme “Building resilience through hope.” As they do every year, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and overseas compatriot groups are organizing campaigns to call for Taiwan’s participation in the global body. However, unlike previous years, Taiwan seems to be riding a higher wave of support than usual. The pandemic has exposed countless shortcomings
On Wednesday, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson held a news conference via video link to announce a major strategic defense partnership, dubbed “AUKUS.” In an indication of the sensitivity and strategic weight attached to the pact, discussions were kept under wraps, with the announcement taking even seasoned military analysts by surprise. AUKUS represents a significant escalation of the transatlantic strategic tilt to the Indo-Pacific and should bring wider security benefits to the region, including Taiwan. At the forefront of the trilateral partnership is a bold plan to transfer highly sensitive US and