Despite being a permanent resident in Taiwan, as an American woman, the overturning of Roe v. Wade has been a roller-coaster of emotion.
Adding to that pain have been all the people who cannot get pregnant offering their opinions on whether women are entitled to basic human rights, as though anyone with a uterus is just a potential incubator.
If anything, I feel grateful to be living in Taiwan, where my right to reproductive healthcare still exists, although it might be imperfect.
Taiwanese law allows for abortion, but carries a whiff of patriarchy. For instance, a married woman seeking an abortion requires spousal consent.
The language of the original law is also unacceptably eugenicist; it references “upgrading the quality of the population,” but not women’s rights.
To be clear, abortion should absolutely remain legal in Taiwan. If anything, the law must be amended to make abortion a basic right, not a eugenicist fantasy.
Thus, imagine my disappointment reading Dino Wei’s Taipei Times article (“Abortion laws affected Taiwan’s society,” July 7, page 8). His argument rests on seeing women as breeding stock, not human beings. This should horrify anyone capable of becoming pregnant.
Bodily autonomy means a person’s body cannot be used against their will, even to “save the life” of another. We do not do this with any other procedure. Even if someone is the only suitable organ donor to a dying person, we accept that they cannot be forced to give up a body part. We do not even do this to corpses without prior consent.
Therefore, even if you believe a fetus is a person, it is still unacceptable to force someone to carry it against their will.
It does not matter if you are offended by the person’s sexual behavior. In other words, abortion is not a referendum on whether women having sex is bad (it is not).
Most of Wei’s arguments offer little to no evidence. He wrote that “gynecologists are even lamenting” this trend. Which gynecologists? Name some, please. “Young students use abortion as contraception”? There are no statistics to back that up. If the “vast majority” of abortions are performed for health reasons, and data on how many are unintended pregnancies remain confidential, one cannot possibly know that. If abortion rates are falling, that directly contradicts the assumption that younger women are seeking it.
Many of these young women and sad gynecologists likely exist in people’s heads, not the real world.
Even if young people are getting abortions rather than using contraception, the solution is not to hijack their bodies to increase Taiwan’s population — the solution is improved sex education. This should be obvious.
Most offensive is the assumption that Taiwan should rethink abortion because of population decline. Most people want children eventually; the solution to population decline is to foster a society where people feel secure having children, not treating women like egg sacks.
We are not egg sacks, we are people.
Jenna Lynn Cody is a teacher trainer based in Taipei.
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