Former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) recently asked the DPP presidential hopeful Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to make her sexual orientation public. Shih showed no care whatsoever for the fact that sexual orientation is a matter of privacy that has nothing to do with public interest. Shih said he supports the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) community, but that is nothing but a cover for his discrimination and political manipulation.
However, what we need to ask is why the topic of sex and sexual orientation can be used so successfully to manipulate political elections time and time again. The sensitive nature of one’s sexual preferences can be seen from how it has affected both the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and, more recently, the DPP.
I believe the fundamental reason behind this is that Taiwanese society has always avoided publicly discussing issues related to sex and we are now increasingly moving in the direction of a “desexualized” society. Sex has become a taboo: Naked bodies cannot be viewed, gays and lesbians should stay at home and not go marching in the streets, and TV news about sex education must be blocked out with a mosaic.
However, people still talk about it, digging for sexual dirt as if they are the paparazzi. We all know the more something is forbidden, the more alluring it becomes and the more gossip it attracts. To solve this strange situation where sex and sexual orientation are politically manipulated, we have to seriously think about why sex cannot be openly discussed in Taiwan.
The famous Italian author and semiotician Umberto Eco in his commentary on WikiLeaks, “Not such wicked leaks,” asked: “How can a power hold up if it can’t even keep its own secrets anymore? ... It is also true that anything known about [Italian Prime Minister Silvio] Berlusconi or [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel’s character is essentially an empty secret, a secret without a secret, because it’s public domain. But to actually reveal, as WikiLeaks has done, that [US Secretary of State] Hillary [Rodham] Clinton’s secrets were empty secrets amounts to taking away all her power. WikiLeaks didn’t do any harm to [French President Nicolas] Sarkozy or Merkel, but did irreparable damage to Clinton and [US President Barack] Obama.”
What Eco meant is that when things have been exposed to sunlight, nothing is secret and no one can gain power from secrets. Those politicians who control their power and manipulate the public through secrets are no longer powerful when that secret is exposed.
I am not saying that Tsai should respond to Shih’s request. What I mean is that supposing one day sex is no longer a secret nor a taboo in Taiwanese society and discussion is open and natural, then nobody would be interested in exposing or gossiping about other people’s sex lives, sexual orientation or gender identity — who would want to know such everyday things? No one.
Like Eco said by quoting Georg Simmel in his commentary: “A real secret is an empty secret.”
If one day, sex or sexual orientation are no longer a secret and there is no bias or discrimination against sexuality and sexual orientation in Taiwan, it would be impossible to use people as tools in political struggles or for politicians to manipulate them anymore. However, before that day comes, no one has the right to force others out of the closet, because that not only violates privacy, it is also a matter of structural discrimination against sex and gender rights.
Ashley Wu is director of international affairs at Taiwan Tongzhi Hotline Association.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS