At a campaign rally for Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislative candidate Chang Szu-kang (張斯綱) on Thursday last week, Yaung Chih-liang (楊志良) — a former health minister, no less — made some predictably horrid comments about Chang’s female opponent. Somehow blaming the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for the low birthrate, Yaung called DPP Legislator Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) “useless” for being unable to bear children at nearly 50 years of age. He even turned to a KMT city councilor sitting near him and told her to “go home to make love” with her husband when she told him she had no children. The next day he refused to apologize, saying he was “just stating facts.”
Wu rightfully blamed her opponent for inviting Yaung to speak at the rally. The former minister was still given a microphone, despite months earlier causing an uproar when he blamed domestic violence on the public being unable to beat up President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). Wu and her fellow DPP members were also quick to turn the situation around, saying that such remarks represent the “mainstream view” within the KMT.
Although it goes too far to insinuate that most KMT politicians would agree with Yaung’s remarks, the incident points to systemic issues that remain unaddressed. That the KMT still stands behind someone like Yaung, who is also a key figure in the party’s think tank, indicates a fundamental disregard for women’s issues. Especially after this past hallmark year for Taiwan’s #MeToo movement, it is damning that the party feels as if it does not need to loudly and publicly denounce the man behind such comments.
Other parties are not off the hook either. A questionnaire on gender-related policies released last week produced “disappointing” results, the 28 civic groups who initiated the survey said. The DPP mostly proposed continuing its existing policies, while the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) proposals were “lackluster, unambitious and uninterested in advancing gender equality,” they said. All three gave nonspecific responses to most of the items, offering vague ideas such as “more flexible” parental leave or promising to continue discussions on issues. They might not be openly hostile like Yaung, but that the parties chose to answer with unclear platitudes shows that women’s issues are not a priority.
Do not forget the many sexist comments that have come from TPP Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) over the years. He seems to have reined it in somewhat since his “suitable for sitting at reception” and obstetricians “only deal with one hole” comments 10 years ago, but there is no evidence to show that his attitude has changed. If he and his party were unable to see how inviting scantily clad dancers dressed as flight attendants to perform at the inauguration of his women’s campaign support group in August last year was offensive, they likely cannot be trusted to listen to women when drafting policies.
Voters should also remember how the parties handled the cascade of #MeToo allegations last year, especially accusations of sweeping sexual harassment complaints under the rug. All three main parties were implicated, and all three require some serious introspection, but the opposition seemed more preoccupied with attacking the DPP than looking inward. That they would use people’s worst experiences as political fodder is pretty damning.
Gender issues are far and away not the only thing these candidates must address during this packed campaign season, but they are still important. A politician’s or party’s treatment of women shows how they consider perspectives different from their own, providing a rare peek behind the curtain of what these candidates are really like behind the bluster. Voters would do well to pay attention.
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
Despite calls to the contrary from their respective powerful neighbors, Taiwan and Somaliland continue to expand their relationship, endowing it with important new prospects. Fitting into this bigger picture is the historic Coast Guard Cooperation Agreement signed last month. The common goal is to move the already strong bilateral relationship toward operational cooperation, with significant and tangible mutual benefits to be observed. Essentially, the new agreement commits the parties to a course of conduct that is expressed in three fundamental activities: cooperation, intelligence sharing and technology transfer. This reflects the desire — shared by both nations — to achieve strategic results within