National Taiwan University (NTU) has come under fire after an offensive set of proposals by two students running for president and vice president of the student council caused an uproar over the weekend. Among the proposals were requiring girls with “boobs smaller than an A cup” to take two national defense credits and boys with “dicks shorter than 10cm” to take home economics class, as well as banning people with a body mass index of more than 20 from taking elevators, and barring LGBTQ students and dogs from playing Arena of Valor during student council meetings. They also opposed admission quotas for indigenous people, overseas Taiwanese and athletes.
Even though the candidates have said they meant “no harm” and apologized for their immature and out-of-line behavior, the discriminatory proposals have been widely condemned across the board: NTU Economics Department said it has forwarded the case to the university’s Gender Equity Education Committee for investigation, while a group of NTU alumni working in the banking and finance industry said they have put the two on their employment blacklist.
This and similar incidents in the past reveal underlying issues in Taiwan’s education system, social environment and right to free speech.
As Taiwan has a test-oriented education system, pre-college students spend most of their time studying, taking exams and going to cram schools. Socioeconomically well-off families can usually give their children a leg up in academic performance with additional tutoring or resources. As a result, students who get into top-ranking universities, such as NTU, usually share a similar privileged background and educational experience. Without a more diverse student body, they are encased in a bubble that renders some less sympathetic to the plight of others.
The social environment also plays a role in the students’ behavior. For instance, previous mayoral elections witnessed a fair share of candidates who came up with ludicrous and farcical proposals, ranging from setting up casinos in Yangmingshan National Park to drilling for oil on Itu Aba Island (Taiping Island, 太平島) or promising to set up a Taiwan Disneyland. Seeing adult politicians touting outlandish ideas, it is little wonder some students think politics is an arena for laughter and buffoonery.
Taiwan is a nation that values freedom of speech, but there is a limit, especially when it involves hate. The two students and those who spoke up for them seem to think the proposals were merely badly phrased jokes or trivial impulsive acts. However, that they would consider sexist and body shaming remarks “funny” means that the concept of bullying or gender equality is completely lost on them. As joke-telling is truth-telling with a bit of exaggeration, the proposals reflect a bigoted, discriminatory and patriarchial view of the world. To make matters worse, these speeches were made in an arena that seeks to garner power and support. If the two candidates were elected, who could promise that the proposals would not come true?
As adults, the two students’ behavior is inexcusable and they should take full responsibility for it. In 2017, Harvard University withdrew its admission offers to several incoming first-year students who had set up a Facebook group to share sexually explicit, racist and anti-Semitic images. In a similar manner, NTU should expel or mete out equivalent punishments to the two students.
As the most prestigious university in Taiwan, NTU has every responsibility and obligation to send the right message to society: It does not admit students who are bigots and all incoming students must remember to leave their toxic privilege — the kind that allows them to laugh at the disadvantaged and to reinforce ugly and misguided stereotypes — at the door. Only by adopting such a tough stance can it help bring about a healthy speech environment.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission