The Control Yuan has been looking into the issue of Chinese spouses and has issued a report on the laws governing them and their social implications. The report points out that these laws are both unconstitutional and in breach of their human rights. It also says prejudice against Chinese spouses still exists in Taiwanese society.
This came just as Democratic Progressive Party Legislator Chen Ting-fei (陳亭妃) made some cutting remarks about these spouses, accusing them of trying to divorce as soon as they receive citizenship. Chen also criticized any suggestion of amending the law to give them more rights.
I often hear people using similar arguments against female immigrants to support the assertion that the government should not guarantee the rights of spouses from China or any other foreign country. They also argue that the government should not reduce the number of years these women have to wait until they can get citizenship, the rationale being that withholding citizenship keeps them looking after the elderly people in the family and performing their duties as a wife and mother — so the argument goes.
Taiwanese men are going off to China, Vietnam, Thailand and Cambodia in search of a wife to take care of them and act as baby-making machines. This wife is expected to know her place and not complain. Naturally, the idea of divorce to follow her own dreams is out of the question, and the state has created laws to enforce these expectations.
This sort of portrayal of such women smacks of a male chauvinism best consigned to the past. How many people in Taiwan today would apply such “standards” to Taiwanese women? Taiwanese women left behind the demure Oshin character we saw on TV many years ago and have learned to demand their rights and create the future they want. Taiwanese men, too, are well aware that they need to treat their partner as an equal. The days of expecting Taiwanese women to be obedient baby-making machines are in the past, and there’s no going back.
It does appear, however, that foreign spouses are taking on the “traditional role” of the Taiwanese woman. Taiwanese men are now picking foreign women who they believe are going to do as they say and many Taiwanese women seem to be happy to allow these “outsiders” perform a job that they themselves do not want to do. Taiwanese men and women enjoy equal rights in this country; is it acceptable to deny these same rights to others simply because they are non-Taiwanese?
The legal system is complicit in this. As the law stands, the residency status of these immigrant spouses is far from certain until they actually obtain Taiwanese citizenship. It is an endorsement of traditional patriarchy, effectively saying that the woman has to “behave herself” because if her husband files for divorce she will be sent “back to where she came from.” These women undertook to begin a new life in a foreign land, so they are likely to be strong and capable people. Ironically enough, before they obtain Taiwanese citizenship, they are more often than not expected to suppress themselves and play the submissive woman.
In other words, laws like these which work to restrict new immigrants create inappropriate expectations among Taiwanese: that it is OK to ensnare women because of their immigrant status for a period of servitude defined by the time it takes them to receive their citizenship. If the Taiwanese man goes looking for a foreign spouse with this kind of attitude, can we really blame these women for viewing the moment they obtain Taiwanese citizenship as the end of their contractual obligations?
Not only should our laws be rewritten to stop the oppressive and prejudiced treatment of spousal immigrants, they should actually make positive assurances. Only when new immigrants are accorded the same status as Taiwanese women will the men in this country stop looking for a Chinese or Southeast Asian wife to be “a convenient caregiver” or “an obedient mother for my children.” This would make possible an equal and healthy foundation for international marriages.
Bruce Liao is an assistant law professor at National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS