Public debates over discrimination based on educational background have emerged in the past week, after Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Legislator and Hsinchu mayoral candidate Ann Kao (高虹安) defended herself against an accusation of plagiarism of her doctoral thesis.
As Kao’s defense was perceived as “arrogant” by many and she came under fire, Taipei Mayor and TPP Chairman Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) attempt to support her by comparing her treatment to that of a rape victim only added fuel to the fire.
Chinese-language media on Tuesday reported that Kao allegedly plagiarized two previous studies, which she had coauthored with her doctoral advisor, in her dissertation. While Kao defended herself by saying that self-plagiarism is not a copyright infringement, she did so by ridiculing former Hsinchu City mayor Lin Chih-chien (林智堅), whose master’s degrees were revoked by National Taiwan University (NTU) and Chung Hua University (CHU) for plagiarism, which offended some people.
“I, Ann Kao, from a young age studied at Taipei First Girls’ Senior High School, entered National Taiwan Normal University as the top candidate and graduated from NTU with a No. 1 academic performance award by the Phi Tau Phi Scholastic Honor Society. I am not someone who graduated from the evening division of CHU and later needed to ‘inflate’ myself with an NTU master’s degree,” she said.
After protest by CHU students and alumni, she was asked by its students’ association to respond. Kao on Wednesday evening released a video apologizing to CHU faculty and students for her “imprecise wording.” On Wednesday, Kao cried during a radio interview while explaining that she felt wronged and angry because she “is not Lin Chih-chien and did not plagiarize.”
On Friday, at the Legislative Yuan, she avoided reporters’ questions about the accusation, but used her smartphone to record the reporters. She later said she was just “showing them her phone case.”
Ko on Thursday compared Kao’s situation to “when a bully tries to rape a girl, and the girl resists and bites him, but everyone blames her for biting,” adding that their political rivals had gone too far in “using the state apparatus to attack a little girl.”
Ko’s remark exacerbated the criticism, and politicians across party lines asked him to apologize for his rape metaphor. He brushed them off by saying that he only used “strong words” because he understood Kao’s feeling of defamation.
It is not the first time Ko has used rape as a metaphor, or made sexist remarks. For example, he said “being raped is cheaper than being seduced” when explaining an urban renewal policy, and “obstetricians deal with one hole and make a living between women’s thighs” during a lecture at a university, while at a gender equality forum, he said: “Taipei has imported 300,000 foreign brides.” He has also made discriminatory comments, such as calling a female mayoral candidate “beautiful and suitable for being a counter girl,” and joking that “Taiwanese women who go outside without makeup frighten people on the streets.” He also equated 30 percent of women aged 30 or over being unmarried to a “national security crisis.”
While Kao on Friday supported Ko by saying that his rape metaphor was only a “straightforward reaction” to express his resentment against the pan-green camp for bullying her, he placed her into the role of a “victim” and “a little girl,” incapable of defending herself.
Kao should be using her many media resources to explain herself, instead of hiding behind her phone, or showing off her phone case. Meanwhile, Ko’s rape analogy should not be excused or taken lightly by the public. Tolerating such remarks trivializes the real experience of sexual assault victims, reinforces the male chauvinist attitude, and is an act of feminizing weakness and incompetence.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath