A recent incident involving female students not being allowed to wear shorts at National Tainan Girls’ Senior High School received a lot of attention. A protest by the student body against the school caused much excitement in educational circles. After a lot of publicity, the school quickly held a meeting and used so-called “democratic methods” to reach a five-point consensus. While this issue may seem to have ended happily, the debate surrounding school uniforms is not over.
First, what do we mean by democratic procedure? Although student representatives today participate in meetings and decisions, is this true democracy? Adequate information and discussion are preconditions for democracy, but as gender awareness in schools is very weak, will the voices of students from gender minorities such as gay, lesbian and transgender students be heard and respected?
It was decided that students must continue to wear the school uniform when entering the school and that shorts can only be worn on school grounds, in order to uphold the school’s reputation. Clearly, the school made a value judgment connecting shorts to the school’s honor.
The summer uniform for the school is a white shirt and black skirt. The length of these skirts and shorts are pretty much the same. However, the school believes skirts represent uprightness and propriety, while shorts represent exposure. The real difference is that skirts restrict movement more than shorts. Skirts are preferred over shorts for girls, and have become standard, because they restrict the mobility of female students.
The school considered shorts a part of the physical education uniform, and shorts were not allowed outside physical education class. The new regulations have been relaxed and students are now allowed to wear shorts at the school, making them a part of the school uniform. The question then arises as to why there is still a regulation stating that students must wear the school uniform, but not shorts, when entering the school grounds. This regulation seems to once again treat shorts as not part of the regular school uniform. This is obviously contradictory.
Another thing that is hard to understand is that school uniforms for boys, be it pants, shorts or physical education uniform, have never been so closely linked to school honor. It is fine for some of our male politicians to wear super-short shorts and go jogging in public places, so why is it deemed so disturbing to see girls from National Tainan Girls’ Senior High School wearing shorts — which are also part of their uniform — outside of school grounds?
The shorts incident was a lesson in school democracy and it will also go down in the history of gender movements in schools. Unfortunately, the media and Internet users trivialized and sullied this serious action for gender equality by saying that the female students were “taking their pants off.” Also, the results of the new democratic procedure are limited. We hope that schools will be able to move beyond discussions about trousers and shorts and engage in more fundamental dialogue and discussion about the necessity of school uniforms.
This incident also highlights the awkward presence of military instructors on school campuses, which is another serious issue for school democracy to deal with. Schools have academic staff, counselors and security guards. Why can’t we put an end to the practice of also having military instructors, which is a remnant from Taiwan’s periods of military rule and political tutelage?
Bih Herng-dar is an associate professor at National Taiwan University. Su Chien-ling is a board member of the Taiwan Gender Equity Education Association and an associate professor at Ming Chuan University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS