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.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of