Just as the Michelin Guide controversy had run its course on social media, Disney+’s drama series Women In Taipei has ignited a new wave of discussion about stereotypical depictions of the differences between northern and southern Taiwan.
As only three episodes have aired so far — with the plot involving a woman from Tainan moving to Taipei for work — it is still too early to jump to any conclusions.
However, as Disney+ series have dealt with stereotypes associated with Taipei and Tainan before, the show has provided Internet users with fresh material for trolling and could generate further debate as it continues.
Provided by an over-the-top media service, Women In Taipei has become a hot topic as it not only presents stereotypes of northern and southern identity, but also leads to the formation of ideologies regarding regional differences in Taiwan via subjective perceptions.
Heated online discussions about the north and south come and go like flu waves: sporadic, but sometimes seasonal.
From the quality of sidewalks and the way locals eat tomatoes, to every aspect of life, the debates have showcased the regional differences caused by material conditions and history after decades of development.
Embedded with personal judgements, these differences quickly became points of friction causing fights online.
There is no doubt that these differences could be measured with statistics and other indicators, but no one looks at the data when engaging in a fight of words and opinions for a moment’s pleasure.
Leaving aside what the indicators are — mainly resource allocation and policies — it would be easier to draw conclusions to explain the difference between the ideologies of people who prefer the north over the south, or vice versa, using identity construction and stereotypes.
In the online arguments, people from Taipei are often described as “residents of Tian Long Guo [天龍國, Kingdom of the Celestial Dragons] who do not deign to understand Taiwan,” “people with vested interests” and “pan-blue die-hards,” while those from Tainan are described as “traditional and friendly Taiwanese,” “the oppressed” and “supporters of the Democratic Progressive Party.”
As the November local elections draw near, arguments on social media repeatedly lead to ideological differences.
Going back to the Disney+ series, the female protagonist’s dream to go to Taipei when she was studying at school involves the character’s own stereotyping of Taipei, while the tribulations and difficulties encountered at work in Taipei are stereotypes written into the plot.
Regardless of opinion, viewers take part in the stereotyping process with either the character or the plot.
As a Taipei resident who has never set foot outside the capital besides fulfilling military duty, I have never felt particularly proud or privileged of being from Taipei. After all, Taipei is a big city and I have yet to uncover every inch of it. Rather than fighting over an illusionistic sense of identification for a city, I find it more practical to see if I can experience happiness in everyday life.
The female protagonist came to Taipei because she thought she could find happiness there instead of trying to become a Taipei resident.
Taipei is far from a shining city on the hill for people to proudly identify themselves with, but it could be if it delivers happiness.
Chang Yueh-han is an adjunct assistant professor in Shih Hsin University’s Department of Journalism.
Translated by Rita Wang
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
RSS