On October 30th, I am presenting on the topic of “Gender and Immateriality” at the 29th Annual Conference of the English and American Literature Association in Taiwan and, funny enough, Taiwan is currently awash with news of sex self-identification.
Gender identity ideology has ripped through Western society at full force, bringing out tired old stereotypes and misogyny disguised as progressive thinking, and is now extending across the globe.
On September 23, the Taipei High Administrative Court issued a ruling allowing a trans-identified male calling himself “Xiao E (小E)” to change his legal sex to female without sex reassignment surgery — the first of its kind.
Until now, individuals could not change their sex on an ID card unless they provided medical certificates confirming a diagnoses of gender dysphoria and proof of a sex change operation.
How did this ideology reach Taiwan — an Asian nation on the edge of the Pacific? It appears certain groups in Taiwan have been working in near secrecy to make this happen.
The last three decades has seen Taiwan join the ranks of the most vibrant democracies in Asia. Since democratization began in the 1990s, democracy and respect for human rights have become an increasingly prominent part of the island’s identity and values.
Taiwan became the first country in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage in May 2019. I was there at the marches, rallies, and the Pride Parades leading up to this monumental victory for equality.
What marriage equality, the women’s rights movement, and the civil rights movement have in common is that they extended the rights of a privileged group to everyone.
But that isn’t the case. What campaigners mean by “trans rights” is the “right” to identify as the opposite sex — socially, legally, and in every other context.
Equal access to housing, healthcare, employment, and safety are basic rights that (should) belong to every person in the world. Ensuring all individuals can live free from harassment, violence, and discrimination is also a worthy goal, and trans-identified people deserve this, like everyone.
Women fought to have access to single-sex spaces, services, and opportunities — allowing males to access female-only spaces like change rooms, shelters, and prisons should not be framed as a human right.
It is not a human right to require that everyone accept subjective beliefs as objective reality. It is a privilege to demand to be socially and legally treated as the opposite sex — to compel the speech and the actions of others.
The acceptance of and legislating around gender identity ideology is happening at a very rapid pace in the country I call home. The following is a timeline of Taiwan’s progression to self-ID:
1988 : Two doctors defined the surgical requirements to change one’s legal sex in Taiwan as the removal of reproductive organs and the completion of so-called “sex reassignment surgery” (SRS), including vaginoplasty and phalloplasty.
Other criteria for legally changing sex in Taiwan included: *Living as opposite sex for at least two years and adapting well *Having the support of parents and family *Being aged between 20 and 40 years old
*Patient intelligence above mid-range, an IQ score of between 85 and 115 *Ruling-out patients seeking to perform surgery due to mental disorders, paraphilic disorders, or excessive mental stress
For 20 years, this remained the only way to legally change your sex in Taiwan.
November 2008 : As SRS is often expensive and quite risky, human rights organizations and various activists worked with the Department of Health (now called the Ministry of Health and Welfare), to change the 1988 criteria to the following:
“Application of trans-identified individuals requires two certificates of diagnosis from two different licensed Taiwanese psychiatrists, and a certificate of diagnosis from a licensed Taiwanese medical institution stating the removal of breasts, uterus, and ovaries in women, and penis and testes in men.”
October 2013: The Office of the President Human Rights Committee held a meeting and decided the Executive Yuan should coordinate with the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Health to come up with a better policy for legal sex changes.
The conclusion also stated that details should be discussed further with affected agencies and ministries. No women’s organizations were mentioned or consulted.
“It is not recommended to allow the change of legal gender solely based on Psychiatrists’ Certificates of diagnosis. We recommend that the government should form a special agency dedicated to this specific purpose instead, to ensure and protect the rights of the affected individual.”
The Chinese language news outlets that covered this case (UDN News, ET Daily, Apply Daily, LTN Liberty Times) all did so with no comment on how these changes would impact women in Taiwan.
Across the board, they printed copy and paste statements from groups representing trans activist interests, and offered no counter opinion or discussion of potential harm to women and girls.
The two English language news outlets to discuss the case — Focus Taiwan and Taipei Times — provided the barest of details and also failed to discuss negative impacts on women.
According to a Taiwanese source I spoke with who is active in the LGBTQ community, in 2020, the Executive Yuan (Taiwan’s highest administrative branch) funded research on public opinion regarding gender self-ID, which is being led by the gender studies department at a local Taiwanese university.
The project is called “Legalization of Gender Change Requirements and Legislative Suggestions,” and aims to assess public and/or LGBTQ community opinions on self-ID requirements to provide the Executive Yuan direction on possible legislative change.
According to an anonymous source I spoke with who works for the government, the research is strongly biased towards requiring only self-declaration of identity. This research is costing the Taiwan government upwards of 1.3 million Taiwan Dollars (roughly $37,000 USD).
The survey seems, almost by design, very difficult to find online — a government official who reached out to me had trouble finding the Google form, and, unlike the general public, he actually knew what to search for.
Searching online for information on the research being conducted — or the survey itself — only reveals the institutions who bid to conduct the research. The only actual links to the form are found on transgender or LGBTQ related forums.
The organizations behind the research do not seem interested in including the general public and are heavily biased, only seeking out participation from a few select groups within the LGBTQ community.
There are many trans people around the world who acknowledge that surgery cannot actually change one’s sex. Not all of those who have had sex-change operations and/or identify as “transsexual” or “trans” push to enter female spaces, or force others to use incorrectly sexed pronouns.
Trans is not a monolith, and many with dysphoria are under no illusions about their biological reality. Yet, trans-identified individuals who deviate from the preferred narrative are not being included in the conversation.
It appears as though the Executive Branch already knows what they want to include in their bill, which, if passed, will ensure one need only self-declare an inner sense of “gender identity” in order to legally change sex.
They are promoting what is called a “legal fiction,” which is created when the law acts as if something is the case, for certain defined legal purposes, when in fact it is not. Humans cannot change sex, but we are being coerced into an immersive fiction by Taiwan’s government into believing they can.
This graph shows the increase in trans-identified men and women over the years in Taiwan. Note the disproportionate increase in trans-identified males. This graph was published by the National Yangming Jiaotong University using information provided by Taipei Veteran General Hospital.
(According to the Taiwanese calendar, which counts years starting from the creation of the Republic of China, the numbers 85–102 refer to the years 1996–2013.) 本圖使用民國紀年，85年對照的是1996年
Even the term, “gender identity,” is a misnomer — in fact, gender identity legislation requires others to identify you as a member of the sex you proclaim.
[Exceedingly rare disorders of sexual development (DSDs) are medically identifiable conditions that deviate from the sexual binary norm. They do not constitute a third sex.]
And setting aside the sticky issue of what it would even mean to “feel” male or female, why would such a feeling matter if physically being male or female does not? Why should immaterial feelings of “femaleness” matter in law, trumping the material reality of our physical bodies?
Convincing people to accept identities that are subjective and have no basis in material reality is not an easy task, which is probably why this recent ruling was a surprise to many in Taiwan.
If you want everyone to accept your gender identity as valid, then the populace must be persuaded that sexed bodies are not material, but that gender identities are. If you think you cannot convince your populace, you try to push through laws without their knowledge or informed consent.
Material facts about the way women are treated in society — and the protections and spaces we require — must be acknowledged in consideration of this issue.
Studies show that most males who identify as transgender retain their genitalia. Changing the law in order to allow these males access to women’s spaces means any man at all can access women’s spaces, essentially making all spaces mixed-sex spaces, to the detriment of females.
Feelings of being born in the “wrong body” are unverifiable, no matter how strongly felt and expressed. They do not constitute scientific evidence of objective material reality.
“I think I am a woman, therefore I am a woman” cannot be the basis for the legal definition of a woman. It legally disenfranchises women to remove biological sex from the definition of womanhood, or to have it superseded by gender identity.
I have always loved people who rejected gender stereotypes: David Bowie, Boy George, Marlene Dietrich, Annie Lennox, Grace Jones, and every member of BTS—
women who dared to be what we deem masculine and men who choose not to be. The idea that women should be “feminine” (soft, submissive, subservient) and the idea that men must play sports and guzzle beer, or that they shouldn’t wear makeup or show their emotions, are gender stereotypes.
I support rejecting gender. Given that I support gender non-conformity and breaking apart stereotypes, you might think I would be happy about today’s gender ideology. But I am not.
That is because rather than reject gender stereotypes, gender identity ideology says we must define ourselves by them. It is a step back, and it has been skillfully sold as progressive.
It is disappointing to see a thriving democracy like Taiwan circumvent discussion on this topic and use sleight of hand to pass a law that will negatively impact its citizens.
It is reminiscent of its recent authoritarian past, under the guise of being “inclusive.” It is disappointing to see that women’s organizations, trans people who don’t advocate gender identity ideology, and the general public have been left out of the conversation.
Language matters, because that is how we describe reality. When we erase the meaning of the word woman, we erase women, the oppression women face, and the rights women have fought for.
The backlash is already being felt. On popular Asian social media platform Plurk, people are talking about what the government is trying to do, angering many.
Taiwanese women around the city have begun a campaign using messaging app, Line (possibly the most popular way to communicate in this country), detailing the case, and urging their friends, family, and members of the community to contact their local legislators to complain about this verdict.
October 2021: Anonymous members of the LGBTQ+ community in Taiwan began distributing leaflets explaining the ruling and its implications via social media and messaging apps like Line.
Concerned citizens also created an online petition to appeal the ruling on self-ID, on account of wanting to protect women only spaces. Currently, only Taiwanese citizens or permanent residents of Taiwan can sign the petition.
January 2022 : The research currently being conducted will be summarized into a report and the Executive Yuan will then write a bill based on the results. The time to act is now. Contact your local legislator and make your voice heard.
*Note that in Mandarin Chinese, there is no distinction made between the words sex and gender. In Taiwan, when terms like “gender registration” and “legal gender” are used, they are referring to biological sex.
JackieJ
: Thank you for your generosity. I appreciate your sharing this clever article with us! I just read it yesterday, and I immediately realized that I had to share it with friends on Plurk. I really admire your reasonable and logical arguments.
〈性別認同立法正在台灣被強力推動——大眾能有發言權嗎？〉
作者有做功課欸
她要不是會中文就是有懂中文的朋友幫忙
(註：immateriality是一個哲學上的概念，非物質性/無形性，我搜尋相關主題的時候看到巴特勒的理論，所以本文作者的演講可能是針對巴特勒酷兒理論的批評，巴特勒的理論主要就是個人身分由自我定義。)
這些社會運動家說的跨權，指的權利是，被辨認為另一個性別，社會上、法律上以及每一個層面上。
確保每一個人能自由的生活，免於騷擾、暴力與歧視也是一個非常有意義的目標。
自我認同為跨性別的人應得這些權利，就像其他人一樣。
要求自社會與法律層面上被當成異性對待，是一種特權，強迫他人在言行上服從。
(註：本文作者目前定居台灣，出生在夏威夷)
*Living as opposite sex for at least two years and adapting well
*Having the support of parents and family
*Being aged between 20 and 40 years old
以異性的身份生活兩年並適應良好
有雙親與家人的支持
年紀介於20到40之間
*Ruling-out patients seeking to perform surgery due to mental disorders, paraphilic disorders, or excessive mental stress
For 20 years, this remained the only way to legally change your sex in Taiwan.
排除因為心理疾病、性變態還有嚴重心理壓力而尋求手術的病患
長達20年，這在台灣是唯一的、合法改變法律性別的途徑。
(註：這裡用了gender跟前文使用的sex不一樣，sex我會翻譯成性別，gender我會翻譯成社會性別)
並不是所有已經動過手術的或自我認同為「變性人」或「跨性別」的人都想強硬進入女性空間，或是強迫別人使用不正確的性別代名詞。
(註：monolith巨石：指的是強而有力團結一致的團體)
(註：擬制 - 维基百科，自由的百科全书 )
這個概念被創造來假定某項事實，為了特定的法律目的，儘管事實並非如此。
人類無法改變性別，但我們正在被脅迫進入一個沉浸式體驗的(虛構)擬制當中，被台灣政府強迫相信性別可以改變。
(註：此段提到的性別都是Sex)
本圖使用民國紀年，85年對照的是1996年
事實上，社會性別認同立法要求的是別人認同你作為你宣稱的性別的一員。
我們都是被生為兩種生理性別，在出生的時候99.98的人都很容易被觀察出來。
假如你認為你不能說服你的民眾，你這是在缺乏他們的認知與知情同意下推動法律。
(註：material在此處與前文採取不同翻譯，前文通常表達具體的、實質上的，此處應作重要的)
修法以允許這些男人進入女人的空間，代表任何男人都可以進入女人的空間，基本上讓所有的空間都變成了性別混合空間，造成對女性的傷害。
內容是基於英國人口的數據調查，相關的文章我之前po過，但不是這個網站。)
自女人的定義移除生理性別，或是用社會性別認同來取代它，就是從法律上剝奪女人的權利。
(註：人名我就不翻了，都是以雌雄莫辨聞名的人)
女人應該女性化(柔軟、順從、屈服)的這種觀念，還有男人應該運動或是灌啤酒，或是男人不該化妝或展現感情的這種觀念，都是社會性別刻板印象。
有鑑於我支持非常規社會性別，還有打破刻板印象，你可能會以為我會為了今日的社會性別意識型態而高興。
但我並不高興。
這完全是退步，它卻一直技巧性地假裝成進步價值。
我感到很失望，看到婦女組織、不認同社會性別認同意識型態跨性別人士還有普羅大眾，都被阻絕於對話之外。
當我們抹除了女人這個字，我們就抹除了女人，忽視她們面對的壓迫，消滅她們一直以來奮鬥爭取的權利。
連署請願連結
Jaclynn Joseph是一個出生在夏威夷目前定居台灣的博士生兼大學講師。
太長，我明天再來勘誤，統整不一致的地方
Self-ID的概念有點麻煩
，利用通訊軟體Line(可能是這個國家最受
懷疑歡迎的溝通工具)講述細節<--有個會影響意思的別字內文提到的很偏頗調查問卷在這邊，大家可以進去表達反對意見喔
我是覺得GID性別認同障礙這個詞也該撿回來用了，GD性別不安範圍太廣，很多剛進入青春期的人都無法適應自己的身體，但這跟原生的、長期不會消失的GID根本不一樣。
因為政治運作拿掉了
建議把female和women的中文翻譯用詞分開，就這篇作者的用法來說female/male比較接近於生物上的雌性/雄性？（女人、女性有點太含糊，但中文好像沒有更委婉一點的指稱雌雄、公母的說法）
female是翻成女性
雖然我也是覺得這樣翻不夠完善，因為英文的female male的確是比較接近生物方面的公母、牡牝、雌雄，可是中文就是不太會把這些詞用在人類身上，用起來很冒犯
雖然我不知道是不是因為領域產生的偏差
如果要區分好像也只能前面加形容詞
我也釐清了一些思路，遣詞用字真的影響思考
我以前寫論文時，sex/gender是採用「生理性別／心理性別」的寫法。因此female就是生理女性。
雖然通常sex/gender會被直譯成「性／性別」，但這種翻譯在中文裡真的很容易混亂。噗主這種翻法我覺得不會產生混淆。沒問題的！
I just read it yesterday, and I immediately realized that I had to share it with friends on Plurk.
I really admire your reasonable and logical arguments.
其實我覺得最難翻的是self identification
只照字面翻自我認同，根本翻不出它的目的：自定義身份，並強迫別人也認同
看這篇是寫2014
其實他們就是些有錢人，通常也不是專業競技運動選手，犯罪了也能請律師，家暴也不怕輪到他們去尋求庇護，所以女人的處境對他們來說毫不相關。
我本來也沒有特意去查，結果越了解那些「新進」國家，就發現他們根本就沒有比較進步，才會一直落入性別刻板印象的陷阱裡
雖然Monolith（獨石碑）原意是這樣，不過在中文語境下好像也可以翻譯成「鐵板一塊」，更接近華文圈講到「強而有力團結一致的團體」時會用的詞？
它還有帶點忽視內部個體意願跟差異的意思
上文有提到這個問卷執行單位的得標價格是一百三十幾萬
客觀說一句，其實不算高啦
世新得標只有一百三十幾萬
〖丁】 : 謝謝回應，老實說我是第一次比較關注這種事，很多訣竅都不懂
但關閉的時間點真的太妙了，雖然整份問卷都充滿問題也不差這個
如果報告先做出來了也可能提早結案，做不出來也可能再延後（現在國外逐漸燒起來了，我猜提早結案的可能性比較高）
其實覺得對於所謂心理認同女性有疑問 如果對於女性空間被男性身體侵占都沒辦法同理的話 那又怎麼算心理認同女性？感覺根本沒有認同啊？
只是覺得女性在社會上吃香，所以想當女生，卻忽略女性生理上帶來的生活不便之處。
她們的人生走的路往往比一般人艱辛，畢竟要承受被意淫的眼光比一般人多，別人對她們的標準也比一般人高。
一般人考試考六十分算及格，她們要考九十九分才算過關。
孩紙，帥哥跟美女都是這個社會的少數資源好嗎？（茶）
我有豐滿的朋友從小就被開胸部玩笑
重點是 研究早就證明 生理女性受到性方面的暴力或是傷害時 心理的影響比男性嚴重
從來都不是"生理男生也會被性騷擾或是強暴啊" 而是 生理女性本來就承受的比生理男性多