My Feminist Rant - Wooooooohooooo!

I've been struggling for awhile with a way to get this from my mind to written word without coming up with something totally nonsensical, or writing with the wrong tone, and I am sorry to say that I'm not sure I can do it -  so I'm just going to jump in anyway.

Of course I'm still procrastinating - every time I get the chance I jump away to do something on Facebook or on a forum I like, purposely and not-so-subconsciously slowing down my writing of this post. I'm only still trying because I feel it needs to be said.

A former friend of mine on Facebook linked awhile back to two blog posts: I can't find one, but the other is here. Normally I wouldn't bother linking to such crapulent tripe, but it makes a fine example of what I'm going to talk about. Be warned, though: I'm not exaggerating when I say that it's crapulent tripe.

The one I couldn't find was all about how "Western women have lost their femininity" - but it made no clear points, it refused to even define femininity, it assumed we would all know what it was (like porn: "I know it when I see it") and then, after dipping her toe into what that might be, backpedals and includes a bunch of traits that could be both masculine or feminine, and a few that are generally associated with masculinity. At no point does she make clear what she's actually talking about, which is strange considering that she's claiming we Western women have "lost" it.

Now, I wrote an entire blog post about femininity and didn't define it, but then I was talking about a general feeling I had, not going on about what it was and who did or did not have it. I could have been more rigorous in my definition, but I do feel that my attempt to discuss my general mental state is quite different from pointing at a specific set of traits that an entire group of women has apparently "lost".

Back to the main topic.

What bothers me about this whole thing - "Men like Asian women because they are more feminine" or "cute" - is not that lots of men believe it, or that lots of them feel that way. Clearly, they do. Whatever - they can like what they want. It's fine: I have a certain set of traits that I find attractive, so does my husband, so does everyone. All it means for me is that if I were single, that men who feel that way aren't men who would be right for me, and that's OK.

It's more that it's racist, sexist (but not in the way that you think I might go off on) and overgeneralizing.

I don't feel it's sexist insofar as men should like Trait X but they actually like Trait Y. As I said, I don't care what they like - we all like what we like and it's fine. It's sexist in that it groups women into categories: cute and not cute, feminine and not feminine, Western and Asian. It makes blanket statements about women as though we are one amoeba-like mass of people who are all more or less the same in that we can be generalized about: Cute Women GOOD, Uncute Women BAD. Asian Women GOOD, American Women BAD.

I don't know about you, but last I checked most of us exist in more than two dimensions. I can be difficult, tough, even bitchy with people who piss me off, give me a hard time, say stupid things or make my life difficult. I can also be sweet as pie to good people. My friends, and Brendan, might describe me as "tough" or "stubborn", but not difficult - because I'm not. To them. I'm nice to them. I'm nice to people I don't know who give me no reason to be anything other than nice. I'm not so nice only if I need to be. It's the same for "cute" - while I wouldn't say I am cute, I have had people tell me I'm cute (apparently a foreign woman swearing in Taiwanese - 殺小！ - is absolutely freakin' adorable). We - men, women, Americans, Asians, Westerners, Taiwanese - are not flat-screen displays of archetypes or stereotypes of the groups we belong to.

And yet, men who say they like "Asian" women because they are more "feminine" (or the one in the comment thread in the link above who said I was a "typical American woman") are assuming just that: where do they get off thinking that being female Asian or American, or that there even is a typical Asian or American woman, is enough information by which to judge a woman? Do they not know enough women to know that we are, in fact, individuals? Have they never met a cute, shy, quiet or sweet American woman EVER? Do they truly believe that 51% of a population of over three million would all share the same character traits in the same relative quantities and display them in the same ways?  Do they feel the same about this amorphous - and even bigger - group called "Asian women"?

Yes, there are ways in which one can generalize that contain a kernel of truth, but those generalizations about women - or anyone - break down so much at the individual level when you dare to look at someone in 3D that they are basically irrelevant. I mean, is it true that from a cultural standpoint, women in Asia face more pressure and social education to act a certain way that could be seen as "sweeter", "cuter", "more feminine" or whatever, and that many of them do follow those prescriptions? Is it also true that Western culture has a different view of what is and is not expected of women? Yes, and yes. But then I look at my Taiwanese female friends - one who swears openly and talks about sex happily, another who is strong, clear, independent and direct, another who is loud, talkative, opinionated and not even remotely meek, another who expects and demands equal and respectful treatment, another who can hold her liquor and isn't worried about being seen as stronger, louder or more stubborn than the men around her, and still more beyond that - and think, wait a minute. They're all Asian women. They're all very different people and not one of them fits generalizations about Asian women. Looking more broadly, I don't think I've ever met an "Asian woman" in real life who actually fits all the stereotypes about Asian women (some meet a few, to varying degrees). This is called being human and being an individual.

These women are not exceptions, is what I'm saying. There is nothing abnormal about them. They're examples of millions of other women who don't fit this generalization that's been built up about Asian women. You can say the same for American women, Western women or Whatever women.

What makes it sexist is that I am not sure these guys actually look at women in 3D. When I hear "Asian women are cute", I see a guy with a cardboard cut-out "Asian woman" in his head. I see a guy who doesn't think of women as actual individual people but rather as these strange, inexplicable Other being who can all be lumped together as "Asian" and "Western" in order to help him make sense of the world.

It's also sexist towards men, assuming that all or even most of them want the same things, but I'll cover that under "over-generalizing".

Finally, the post linked above is specifically sexist for the implication that if Western women want to "compete" that they should pay attention to this. Really - I was pretty sure that this whole "modern times" and "egalitarianism" thing meant that women were free to develop our personalities based on what our personalities naturally are, not on what one subset of men would prefer that they be. Why is it incumbent on us to change who we are to please a certain type of man, but not incumbent on men to accept that not all women need to be what they prefer - and that it's best for any given woman to just be herself rather than try to fit into some mold of what he wants? Why the implication that we should alter our personalities to get a man that we probably don't even want, who wouldn't want us if he knew what we were really like? That sounds like hell to me - did it ever occur to that writer that pretending to have a personality that is nothing like who you really are might make a woman unhappy, and that (gasp!) some women might just not want men who prefer personality traits that they don't possess - and that that's OK?

What makes it racist is, well, basically the same, just shift the emphasis from the gender to the ethnicity. "Asian" women are X, "Western" women are Y - what's not racist about that? There's nothing wrong with liking a specific woman from whatever ethnic or cultural background, or having a set of traits you prefer in a woman - it's thinking that all or even most women of that ethnicity share those traits that's racist. Again - have these men talked to so few women that they've never met a fair number of quiet American women or opinionated Asian women, or "cute" American women and "tough" Asian women? I mean, I'm a straight woman and I know enough of both to know that generalizations based on race hold no water at the individual level. Even if there's some truth to them, when it comes to dating any specific woman (or man), they are irrelevant.

It's the same reason why I avoid people who say things like "oh, I'm done with Western women. They're so ________" - so, you wouldn't even consider the possibility that some Western women aren't _________? Or even if you met one who wasn't, you would still avoid her because you're "done" with them as an entire group? Yeah...no thanks. I don't even want you as an acquaintance if you think that way, let alone a friend. I mean, change the sentence just slightly to "I'm done with black people / Jews / gays. They're so ____________." Then you see how offensive that really is. But somehow because it's about women, it's OK? (Which brings it back to "sexist").

It's over-generalizing not just because it over-generalizes about entire (MASSIVE AND GINORMOUS) groups of women, but because it does the same to men. It assumes that all, or even most, men want the same things. How is that not disrespectful to men? Plenty of men don't want those things. Just as not all women want a "provider" (I sure don't), not all men want a "cute" woman ("feminine" is harder to pin down), a "sweet" woman or a "submissive" woman. I have said (anonymously) that I am who I am, and my husband chose to marry me because he loves me for me - not gorgeous, really stubborn, quite loud, foulmouthed (sorry, moms, but I am), tough-when-I-need-to-be but also kind, loving, thoughtful, sincere, honest, hardworking and intelligent me. Often I get pushback - that I bullied him, or that he's just an exception, or he's with me because he can't do better, or that deep down he *wishes* I were more [insert trait they think women should be here] and will eventually tire of me and my troublesome opinions and outspokenness.

Yeah, uh, how is that not disrespectful to him?  Just because he chose a woman who doesn't fit some mold of what they'd prefer in a woman, that means he is either lacking in some way, or he settled, or he was bullied, or he doesn't really know what he wants? Yeah...uh, no. This is where overgeneralizing comes in - what's with assuming that all men want the same things? Are men not individuals who exist in 3D, too? Should we not also accord them the respect of knowing what they want even if it might be different from what you'd want, and trusting them to make those decisions?

Is it really so threatening to these guys that a man would choose a different sort of woman that they must assume he was cowed into it? Gee, I wonder why. What's so terrifying about the idea that someone might like something different from what you like?

What is so wrong with saying "*I* prefer [this type of woman]" instead of "*Men* prefer [this type of woman]"? If you did that, you'd earn a lot of respect from me!

I mean, sure, it's fun to pretend that I have a whip and a leash and I bend men to my will, but actually, I don't.

As for "cute" and "feminine", in Brendan's own words: "Well, if you ask me what attracts me, then yes, I can give you a list of traits I'd consider 'feminine' or that I like in a woman. But otherwise it's such a social and culturally specific thing and so subject to individual tastes and preferences that no, if you want to say these things are definite, then that's nonsense."

I say this because I know Brendan is merely an exception, and neither am I. We might seem to be in the minority but in truth, there are so many people like us - so many men who love assertive women, so many women who are not looking for certain types of men, so many people who do not fit the stereotype of what they "should" be. We're only an exception in that we prove that the rule is ridiculous. A mathematical proof along these lines would not stand, so I fail to see why a sociological one should.

And, again, you can say that there are general trends, but they're so irrelevant when it comes to individuals that I don't see why it should matter. Which is what bothers me about "this is what men like" - no, this is what YOU like. Don't pretend to speak for all men or even most men. That's sexist, too. Even if it's true that many men like these traits, it is meaningless when you look at what this man or that man likes.

I admit that this is, in part, why I am not that active in the expat community. While I realize that all expats are individuals (and am happy to befriend them as such), I run up against this attitude often enough that it's kept me away. I don't want to be around it, I don't want to hear it, and I don't want to be friends with people who spew it. Since I'm all on about "don't generalize", I will say that this hasn't kept me entirely cut off. Why? Because people are individuals and not all expat men are like this. Brendan's not. My friend J is not. My friends' husbands are not.

So, you know, wouldn't the world be a better place if we all just admitted that our tastes are unique to us, and that regardless of general truths about culture, people are individuals, and that two individuals deserve the respect of being seen as whole people who are influenced by, but not entirely defined by, their culture? And that some people like "cute" and some don't, and that people have varying definitions about what "cute" or "feminine" (or "masculine") even are? And then, can we banish the generalizations to the far corner of the conversation where they belong? Is this not a happier world, a world with greater respect for all?

In the end, I said something along these lines - but shorter - on the Facebook status update where the two links appeared. I figured, if someone is going to post something that controversial, then they clearly are fine with strongly opinionated replies. If they weren't, they wouldn't post it. I got defriended, probably not just because my reply contained an opinion, but also because I suspect the original poster disagreed.
               
I told a friend (Taiwanese, male - if that matters) about this. His reply sums it up: "Well, that is not any big loss."

龍都酒樓 ("Rendezvous Restaurant")

Rendezvous Restaurant (龍都酒樓）
台北市中山北路一段105巷18-1號(林森北路100號六條通巷口)
#18-1, Zhongshan N. Road Sec. 1 Lane 105
(closer to enter via Linsen Road near #100 )
02-2563923

I know I've been writing more fluff than thoughts recently, but for whatever reason, these days, despite having a lot of things I want to write about in terms of thoughts, musings, meditations on life, whenever I try it just doesn't come out right or my brain short-circuits.

Hoping that will pass - it always does - and not beating myself up too much for writing fluff in the meantime.

Anyway, last weekend I had the chance to go to the famous 龍都酒樓 in a lane between Linsen N. Road and Zhongshan N. Road, just south of Nanjing E. Road. They're famous for Beijing Duck and dim sum style dishes.

The place caters more to groups, and yes, you should make a reservation.

I can say that the duck is truly fantastic - just as good as other heavyweights like Celestial Kitchen and my personal bugbear, Song Chu. Definitely worth the reservation and price (we had duck and lots of dim sum at two tables with about 8 each, and it cost us all approximately NT650 each).

It's juicy without being greasy, it's flavorful without being cloying, and the little green onion spears are wrapped in a bit of chili pepper to give them a bite. Song Chu's sauce is better, but Rendezvous' is not overly sweet, it's almost slightly antiseptic which is a nice match for the luscious duck.

The decor is like something out of a scene in a restaurant from a kung fu movie - back-lit Chinese medallions, crystal chandeliers, light-colored textured wallpaper, round banquet tables, a balcony and lower seating area. Not usually my style but whatever, the food is good.

I went with a newer group of friends (the one in the picture is the one I know best, his wife is the one looking away) - unfortunately, due to work commitments, my husband couldn't join us. The upside of going out occasionally with a group of locals who are also food lovers and interested in trying the city's best restaurants is that I get to try places that are not often on foreigner radar.  A few savvy long-term expats might know about them, but they rarely make it into guidebooks (guidebook restaurant listings in English make me a little sad sometimes - the world is not right when Kiki gets a nod but 天府, which is quite literally the BEST SICHUANESE FOOD IN TAIWAN HANDS DOWN, is ignored). I get to try the places that locals believe are the best, and it's opened me up to a lot of new options.

And you know, one of the great things about Taipei is that the best restaurants are not necessarily the most expensive restaurants. In fact, they rarely are. You can completely avoid hotel restaurants or places that charge $6000 a head for bird's nest soup (and they exist - I have students who regularly entertain clients at such places) and still forage through the best Taipei has to offer.

Another great thing about eating out with a group of locals is that I have to speak Chinese. I've written before about how having to socialize entirely in Chinese is good for my Chinese, and well, duh. Of course it is. My friend (above) speaks English well, but his wife does not - or she's afraid to, but he insists she really can't and she concurs - and he didn't really start inviting me out to such meals until it was clear that I would be just fine speaking Chinese the entire time. I can understand this: even if someone does speak a foreign language - at least two others at lunch can also speak English well - when out with friends and not at work or in class, the average person will prefer to converse in their native language and having one non-native speaker there, even if that person is a native speaker of a "popular" foreign language like English, can cause discomfort if it means that everyone has to then speak English when, in their free time and with friends they know, they'd perhaps prefer not to.

It happens in business, too: a group of Taiwanese people and their one foreign guest go out or have a meeting, and the presence of the one guest means that the entire language of the group changes to English, not the mother tongue of the majority of the group. I understand completely how someone might not want to repeat that dynamic at a fun Saturday lunch with friends.

I hate to say it, because it sounds suspiciously close to something annoying expat who says things like "oh I only hang out with locals, I get along with them so much better than other [*snicker*] foreigners" would spout, but it's true: not long ago I had another lunch at a restaurant that was not really good (but well-known in foreigner circles) with a group of expats. It was fun, although some things that were said bothered me, but honestly, this was more fun. Instead of conversation topics like "are Taiwanese women materialistic" (sadly, the general consensus seemed to be "yes"), I got to explain, in Chinese, why "Bear Bar" and "G2-Paradise" - two bars behind Red House Theater in Ximen - are such funny names in English. I learned a useful new bit of Chinese vocabulary, too ("G點"). I feel I owe 文昌帝君 for that one. As for the other diners - they were delighted at this tidbit of cultural knowledge. Who says that Taiwanese people are conservative and uptight? That's not been my experience!

It doesn't matter to me if I never go out with that group of expats again, but I honestly do look forward to going out with this group of Taiwanese food lovers in the future.

And I will definitely be returning to 龍都酒樓.

Lao Ren Cha goes Lowbrow at Modern Toilet

This chain of bathroom-themed restaurants is nothing new - certainly old news - but it's new for me. Readers in Taiwan won't be surprised: many of them will have already eaten at one. So, I'm posting this more for family and friends reading from abroad, who are more likely to raise their eyebrows at a restaurant whose theme is "toilets".

Yes, you sit on toilets with strange-looking lids. Yes, the tables are glass-covered sinks or bathtubs. Yes, the food comes in toilet-shaped plateware. The food on offer is basic pseudo-Western fusion (think hot pots, meat-with-rice dishes, spagettis and gratin-inspired dishes, Japanese curry) and is thoroughly mediocre. Perfectly edible but I'm not going to be writing an actual culinary-based review of the place anytime soon.

 What I loved is that so many people seemed to be eating there non-ironically. Now, I can't know that for sure, and Brendan's comment was "Jenna, that's a pretty big assumption to make without much evidence. Considering how hard it would be to eat at Modern Toilet non-ironically, you better have something to back it up when you assert that that's what someone does."

And yes, in the back corner of the photo above, that is a gold-toned poo coil adorning the railing. And yes, below I am sitting next to a faucet fixture attached to the wall (obviously, it doesn't work). Also I wanted to show off my new haircut. I totally look like a college student! In my twenties everyone thought I looked older than I was. In my early 30s, everyone seems to think I look younger than I am. The acne doesn't help.

We decided to go much at the last minute: we wanted to meet a friend for dinner and she was in Zhongshan - but we wanted a not-too-tiny restaurant that we could linger in that would be suited to a small group and has real full meals on offer.

Zhongshan (I'm talking about the area immediately around Zhongshan station, not the entire district) has three kids of restaurants: 

1.) Cafes - great atmosphere, perfect for a coffee or other drink or a dessert, good for small groups and lingering, but generally overpriced, under-portioned and middling food.

2.) Great restaurants that cater to large groups - Celestial Kitchen (天廚) and 龍都酒樓 are in this group. I've eaten at both and they're both fantastic, but you really need to be going there with six people or more. I'll be posting a review of the latter restaurant soon.

3.) Hole-in-the-wall local joints with card tables and disposable chopsticks with great food but lacking a lingering atmosphere.

There's also Ali Baba Indian Kitchen, but we had dinner there less than a week ago.

Then I realized that Jiantan was on the same MRT line and that I'd never been to Modern Toilet, despite having lived in Taiwan for 5 1/2 years. We wouldn't escape uninspiring food, but I'd be able to tick a cultural establishment (I say that half-ironically) off my list. I mean, the place regularly receives global attention and I am asked fairly often by friends in other countries if I've eaten there. It's always a surprise when I say "no". 

So, we went, and it was pretty much exactly as we expected. I had "Korean kimchi hot pot" (about as good as I expected). Brendan had Japanese curry (about as good as he expected). Cathy had some sort of chicken dish with rice (about as good as she expected).

The most famous menu item at Modern Toilet is the poo-coil like soft-serve chocolate ice cream in an Asian-style toilet shaped bowl.

It sure looks the part, but it's really not that good. But, you know, I can now say I've been there, done that, and I don't need to go back unless visitors from abroad are really excited about it.

My humble offering

...to the meme gods.

Let me know if it's too small to read (I made it a size that works well on Facebook)

My Taiwan Valentine

awwwwwwww

"My Taiwan Valentine" being different from "My Taiwanese Valentine", of course. If I had a Taiwanese valentine I think Brendan might be a leeeeeeettle upset.

First, enjoy this. Watch the video, too.

And enjoy this. I think next year Brendan is getting Easter candy and a bag of hammers.

So generally we're not big V-day celebrators. Not because I'm anti-Valentine's day, but rather that I'm anti-crappy chocolate (and most of what's sold on V-day is crap). I'm also, while not the sort who says "I don't want to feel pressured to express my feelings by marketing behemoths for their profit" (although there's some truth to that), I am the sort who has come to realize how unimportant the day really is when you're in a good relationship. I have found that stuff like this takes on outsized proportion when things are bad - like you need that planned expression of affection on the corporate-mandated day to prove to yourself that things really are OK. When things are good, you don't care as much about meeting these expectations.

For me anyway. Some folks are in great relationships and still place importance on days like this, and that's fine too.

But, Brendan and I still like to spend time together, and figure there's no harm in having some of that time be around Valentine's Day. This year, however, we're both working in the evening. In a few short hours I'll be back on the HSR to Hsinchu to teach in the Science Park. Since the day itself is not that important, we had our Valentine's Day Love Fest on Sunday - and took advantage of the gorgeous weather.

We took the Maokong Gondola   - I know a lot of people worry about its safety but I personally think it's fine. I've been on it many times and do not fear that something will go wrong. They should change the name, though. "Gondola" is a dumb name for a cable car, and it's doubly annoying to have to teach students what a "gondola" is and then shrug my shoulders when they ask why that was the name chosen for the cable car.

As you can see, we shared a car with a group of women from SE Asia. At first I thought they were Filipina (I thought they were speaking Tagalog) but now I'm not sure - they didn't say much. They could have been Thai. I know they weren't Vietnamese by the language spoken. They spent most of the time taking glamour shots of themselves, though, not chatting - so it's hard to say.

This is a tough time of year to take the Gondola - with the cherry blossoms on Maokong in bloom, if the weather is even remotely decent and it's a weekend, the thing is packed. We were blessed with a lovely, clear day on Sunday, so we had to wait about an hour to board. They were handing out required "reservation" tickets with boarding times. We arrived at 1:37pm and were handed a ticket for 2:30-2:45. We expected this, though.

There aren't as many cherry blossoms on Maokong as on Yangming Mountain, but enough that the easier task of taking the gondola - vs. driving or taking a bus up Yangmingshan - is a good alternative. They also bloom much earlier in Taiwan than elsewhere (esp. Japan) due to the warmer weather.

It's fairly common in every country where Valentine's Day has made some inroads - it's certainly known in Taiwan - for people to celebrate it when they're young and in love and forget about it when they're old fuddy-duddy marrieds (like me!). I kind of understand that: as I said, if your relationship is good, then Valentine's Day, birthdays, other holidays etc. stop becoming a barometer of your relationship status or "goodness", because you don't need them.

What I've noticed in Taiwan, though, is a different sort of not celebrating Valentine's - in the US you'll get the V-day haters, and the ones who are romantic but not on that day, or the ones who are fine without romance but don't really announce that. You get those who say "oh, we don't bother" but they rarely explain it with "because we've been married for so long". Usually there's an implication that there's romance elsewhere or at other times.

I think this couple had a similar idea
for how to spend the day

In Taiwan, you get the older married folks who not only admit to not celebrating Valentine's, but  say that it really is because they're older and married, and, you know, everyone knows that old married folks don't have romance (that last part isn't actually spoken, but it's implied heavily in the tone), that's for crazy young kids. Not that I ask, but I get the strong sense that there is an acceptance of less romance in these relationships overall. Not so much that they don't bother with Valentine's Day, but that they don't bother with that kind of romantic expression at all.


I can't be sure of this, of course - many American couples wouldn't necessarily cop to having a romance-free marriage, and I could be reading the tone wrong in Taiwan, and be adding an implication that wasn't intended: perhaps the tone used merely conveys a deeper sense of privacy about such  things.

But, you know, while divorce - at least in Taipei - is reaching numbers that rival the US's divorce rate, the whole concept of divorce being acceptable, or no-fault divorce, or even "wow, it's not the woman's fault, we can't automatically blame the wife for not being pliant or dutiful enough" divorce, is fairly new in Taiwan. The idea of remaining single by choice or because you  have high standards is new, too - especially for women. It's a more recent change, which means that old feelings of "you marry because it's socially expected, you have kids because you should and you stay in that marriage even if you're not happy, and even if that can't be fixed, even if your husband as a mistress" still linger. I could see how that would bring about a feeling of "eh, people who have been married for awhile don't have, don't need and shouldn't expect romance or love" which might be echoed in the comments I hear.

But enough dreariness. The weather was so balmy and rejuvenating that, between soft pink sakura and bright blue sky, who can help but feel that love is a beautiful thing?

After walking around - and dodging traffic - we settled in at Mountain Tea House, a short walk from the gondola station but beyond most of the crowds. We go there often, because the view is good and the food is tasty. I especially recommend the Lemon Diced Chicken (檸檬雞丁).

As per my blog's namesake, I brewed lao ren cha and we talked, chatted, ate snacks, and quietly read or studied Chinese. I don't consider retreating behind a book to be unromantic (retreating behind a computer or iPod is more unromantic to me, not sure why) - part of what makes our relationship so great is that we can both be quiet and doing our own thing, and still feel a vibrant connection. That's important - because who can talk all day and all night to one person? Even if you have that early chemistry that makes you want to just spill your guts and talk for hours, it eventually fades (not completely, but it does) and something needs to be there to replace it. A connection that transcends conversation.

We also spent a little time taking glamour shots of ourselves.  Here's my frank admission: while I'm fine with being curvy and average looking in real life, there are two things I know are true about my looks:

1.) I am really not photogenic. At all. Even if I look fine in real life, I look terrible in most photos. I'm OK with that, too, until I actually see the photos, which I quickly delete or de-tag.

2.) I have one really great feature. One thing that, when I look in the mirror, I think "wow, that's just great. That looks good". One thing that helps me be totally OK with being otherwise completely average-looking. I won't tell you what it is. I think I've mentioned it before, and anyway it should be pretty clear. 

So, when good photos of me come along - which happens about once a year, if that - I milk those babies for all they're worth, because it'll be awhile before more good ones are taken.

But first, some glamour shots of my super handsome, I mean really handsome, I mean "da-yum how did I land me such a hottie" husband.

I *heart* the green eyes

I mean I love him regardless, I'd love him even if his face got all messed up or he gained 200 pounds. I'd love him if he was not so good-looking...but you gotta admit, I lucked out in the Hot Husband department.

Then, Brendan took some shots of me, when the sun was providing good light:

We stuck around past sunset, because I love the night view from Maokong. I also have a camera now that has a timer, so I can set it on a flat rail and take decently focused night shots, as though I had a tripod.

Then we ventured down to Nanjing E. Road for dinner at Ali Baba's Indian Kitchen, but that's not terribly exciting - just tasty!

SYS Memorial Hall Lantern Festival 2012

I am a horrible, lazy person. I went to this last week and didn't put up photos, or even edit them, until yesterday (Catherine here certainly beat me to the punch by about 7 days). I've had a long week - I unexpectedly found myself in Hsinchu three nights out of five working in the Science Park, and that not only takes a lot of time (for which I am well compensated, don't feel bad for me) but also a lot of energy.  Generally on Wednesdays I get to race back up to Taipei at warp speed in the passenger seat of a student's car, but that student was on a business trip so it was the HSR for me - which is great, but when you factor in MRT and taxi times it still takes awhile.

But, here, enjoy - we didn't make it to Pingxi this year but we did, for the first time, make it to Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hall, where an entirely different sort of lantern is on display. It's slightly less crowded, too - although even at some distance from the hall it was hard to get a seat anywhere for dinner. We ended up at Harbin Dumpling King and got the last available table. All out of dumplings but that was OK, they still had spiced lamb kebab!

Mmmm spiced lamb kebab - I could go and just eat this.

The lanterns at SYS are spread out over four axes, coming together at a central sculpture by the fountain on the Ren'ai Road side which, every thirty minutes or so, puts on a water and laser show that also involves fire around the edges. A bit corny but fun to watch as part of a crowd.

Now, my camera doesn't take great night photos - even though what I'm using now is technically a professional camera. I'm not sure why this is - you'd think with its huge lens and pro specs that it would do a better job. My best guess is that, because it is a pro camera and not a little one you can shove in your purse, that Canon assumed that for shots like these you, as a real photographer, would obviously have a tripod. I mean duh. But I don't and even if I did I wouldn't want to lug it around this crowd or try to set it up in the unending stream of people.

But, you know, enjoy anyway!

Many of the lanterns this year focused on dragons - "Year of the Dragon", "around the world", "Taipei" and "Taiwan" were popular, if not necessarily creative, themes (love the dragon above though. I think he was my favorite lantern of all).

I also quite like this white tiger. The White Tiger Star is apparently very important in this dragon year, meaning many people will be more prone to sickness or accidents - including those born in the year of the monkeys (that would be me - great).

Less crowded and arguably more romantic was the walk through the park near SYS and Taipei City Hall - the trees were decked in fairy lights and the winding paths were perfect for a short walk hand-in-hand with a loved one (awww).

Back to SYS - we didn't make it through the entire festival - it was just to crowded - although in retrospect I wish we'd stuck it out. At the time it seemed like they were all starting to blend together, but now, looking back at my photos, I can see how different and unique - and well-made - many of the lanterns were.

Also, robots!

 I have to say that I think this one is a tad...I dunno. I raised my eyebrows for sure. I think the guy with a bone in his hair is meant to be a Taiwanese aborigine, which, c'mon - maybe a little racist? The generic white kid is, I think, meant to be French (there's an Eiffel Tower next to a Native American to the right of this photo). I"m not quite sure what to make of it. There's a Pyramid, too!

I didn't get that close to some of the lanterns - it was really a madhouse on Sunday. If you go next year (assuming it's not still going on), try for a weeknight. Trust me.

 These are some of my favorites, too - I love the detailed paint job that gives this set of lanterns more depth.

The park across the street has a whole set of lanterns from Chinese mythology.

Not Fluent, Stop Asking

Photo from this site

It's been 5 1/2 years. 5 1/2 years of learning Chinese - with some extended breaks, but make no mistake, I learned on those breaks, too. I suppose you could count that tortured year in China in 2002 when I taught myself basic survival Chinese, but looking back, I have to wonder. I feel now as though I knew nothing then. At this point, especially as it's clear that I do speak Chinese, although not perfectly, I get a lot of people asking me "You must be fluent, huh. What's that like?" or "So, are you fluent?"

I never know how to answer them. Am I fluent? I personally would say "no", but I don't really know because I don't know what "fluent" means in real terms. Am I fluent in that I can go an entire day and speak/read/write/hear nothing but Chinese with no problem? Yes. Am I fluent in that I can read, I dunno, Confucius? Hell to the NO. Am I fluent in that I don't make mistakes? Of course not.

After five years of mostly self-study, should I be? I don't know. I'd certainly speak at a "higher level" if I'd continued to study hard and attend Shi-da, but I met plenty of people at Shi-da at my level or above who were too nervous or just not, ahem, "fluent" enough to get sentences out that come easily to me, so I don't know.

So, let's explore this whole "fluency" thing.

The idea that "fluency" in a foreign language isn't something that can be measured easily, nor are the metrics to determine it agreed on by any stretch has been pretty well covered online and in the many conversations serious language learners have with each other.

There are some who believe that you're only fluent if you can communicate flawlessly - think on the level of interpreters or native speakers of more than one language. There are others who feel that if you can converse and basically communicate what you need to and get by in day-to-day life vis-a-vis spoken and written communication, even if you make mistakes, then that means you're fluent. Still others have what I view as a warped idea that if you're able to read, write, analyze, do research in and know the classical background of a language, than regardless of how well your speaking of that language flows, then that means you're fluent. A teacher at Shi-da's Mandarin Training Center once told me that if you complete all five books in their series and do fairly well, then you count as "fluent".

Well, let me tell you, I'm on the last book - Book 5 (I never took the class for it, but I own it and have flipped through it and there is a lot that I already know, plus a few things I need to learn) - and I don't feel as close to this "fluency" thing as this teacher confidently asserted I should.

By the first definition, I will never be fluent in Chinese. I can study and study, but I'm never going to reach a point where I speak it, ahem, flawlessly - but then, what does "flawlessly" even mean? Some snob in Beijing might listen to a perfectly fluent native speaker of Chinese from Taipei and proclaim that her Chinese is not "flawless". I might be able someday to interpret Chinese into English, but probably never the other way around. I'll always have a "different", non-native sounding way of speaking it. 

But then, by this definition students of mine who speak far better English than I do Chinese - who have done Master's and even PhD degrees abroad - are not "fluent" because they still make mistakes. I have a friend who got an Master's in the USA and still forgets to put verbs in the past tense occasionally. I have a student - a psychiatrist - who got her PhD at Cambridge and who still makes occasional mistakes or says things in a clearly non-native way or  using awkward grammar, and who doesn't always know just the right adjective or noun for specialized words ("incomprehensible" was on her vocabulary review list recently). With the grammar mistakes she makes - never big, always at a high level, but still noticeable - many language assessment ratings wouldn't put her at an advanced level; she's currently placed in high intermediate (although I teach her as though she's advanced).

But dude, she got her PhD at Cambridge. Can you really say she's "not fluent"?

I have plenty of students who score, in terms of vocabulary range and grammar knowledge, in the mid-intermediates. I'd say it's the biggest group of learners I encounter, and that there are barriers in language learning that keep many language learners at that level. Here's the thing - they make mistakes. They use prepositions of time all wrong, and forget all sorts of tenses and other bits of speech - like conditionals and reported speech - come out a bit wonky (although generally their point is clear). But they can get by just fine. They can handle - and often have handled - life in an English speaking country just fine (although they all claim it's a struggle - well, duh. Sometimes communicating in Chinese in Taipei is a struggle for me. I don't think that ever goes away). They can converse, they can make themselves clear, they can understand spoken English face-to-face. At times it's hard for me to judge how much their understanding is based on grading of my speech, because I now grade my speech almost subconsciously. I would guess that rapid English from one native speaker to another, if it were two people conversing, would be generally understandable but more challenging, with some missed meaning in idioms and nuance. They can generally read just about anything at a higher level than I can read Chinese, but that's hardly surprising. Anyone learning Chinese as a second language feels my pain, my beautiful torment! Other than in obvious spoken mistakes - which rarely obscure meaning - the only time one might question the fluency of these students of mine is in watching television or movies or trying to discern song lyrics.

Which, you know, is just about where I'm at. There are some differences: I tend to know a lot more Chinese slang and idiomatic speech than my students know in English (although they constantly surprise me: once I was discussing "charisma" in political leaders with a student and mentioned Bill Clinton. "Even after the Republicans tried to push him out of office..." Student: "Oh, I know! Because of a blowjob!"...as I produce a fountain of spurting coffee from my nose). I can understand bits of casual conversation between native speakers more easily. I can produce Chinese without having to translate from English in my head. If someone speaks to me in Chinese, Chinese comes out of my mouth in reply without a second thought. This isn't surprising, given that I'm learning on my own in an immersion environment and pick up most of my Chinese from friends. 

They tend to know higher level / business / professional language and read far better than I can - again, not surprising as English is, I believe, easier to read than Chinese and they use their English skills for work, not socializing. It still stuns me how few of my Taiwanese friends have other foreign friends besides me - although some certainly do, and how rarely I come across a student who answers in the affirmative when I ask if they have foreign friends. Colleagues, business partners, acquaintances, yes - friends? Not really.

So, I need to work on more formal Chinese and business Chinese (and reading/writing!) and they need to work on more casual, quick, no-head-translations-please English with a wider range of vocabulary.

But, generally speaking, I can live my life in Chinese without much problem. I can call repairmen, go to B&Q, order food (even foreign food), talk about all sorts of topics from economics to geography to religion to media to history to basic office matters and more (I remain weak in sports, but even in English I don't care about sports). I haven't tried yet but I suspect I could pull off a job interview in Chinese, albeit with mistakes. I can more or less follow the news, although I know I miss a great deal of nuance and pick up a lot from the accompanying visuals. I can do an informal business presentation in Chinese (and have) and can follow other presentations. I can participate in and head a Q&A session in Chinese (and have). I can't read that well when it comes to newspapers or books but I can and do interact with friends on Facebook in Chinese - including fairly meaty posts and messages. I can type just fine but my writing is...well, I can fill out forms and write short notes and postcards by hand, but not much more. I'd feel bad about this, but I have plenty of students who routinely forget how to write even basic characters by hand. I feel ever so vanquished when one student turns to another and asks, "how do you write putao (grape) in Chinese?") THANK YOU.

I know where this places me, and my various students, on the scale of typical "levels" in any given language, but where does it put us in terms of fluency - which I have come to believe is a separate thing?

I don't know. I know that, no matter what Shi-da says, I'm not as close to my ideal of fluent as their system implies. I know that, while my students make intermediate-level mistakes, that while they may not believe it's true, I know that they can get along in an English-speaking environment. 

I personally believe that I'll feel "fluent" when I can turn on the news, move away from the TV and do something else, and still understand in a fair amount of detail what's going on without having to look at the visuals. The other day I had to get a knife refurbished as it had developed a bit of rust (and it was a very expensive knife) -  I could explain that my knife had a problem - here, take a look! - and could you please fix it, but the word "rust" eluded me. When I came to this cafe earlier, I told them that I did not want a particular seat as my backpack would  jut out into the hallway and people could trip over it. I managed to make myself clear, but fairly awkwardly and certainly with a few mistakes. When I can get through exchanges like these with total confidence - even if there are a few mistakes - I'll feel fluent. When I can look at a menu of foreign food and read off my selection perfectly - not nearly perfectly except for that one character I don't know, dammit! What IS that? Oh but they know what I mean - I'll feel fluent. When I can read a blog post clearly or get the gist of a newspaper article in greater detail (I can get the gist now, but basically detail-free), I'll feel fluent. When the number of workarounds I need to make a point clear are diminished considerably - and it becomes a tool I employ rarely rather than fairly often - I'll feel fluent.

When will that be? I don't know. I work towards it, but I do it in my own rambling way.

Do I ever aspire to speak flawlessly? No. I have no aspirations toward interpreting English into Chinese for official purposes, and I have no aspirations to academia in Chinese. Cool as it would sound - yeah, well, I'm totally a professor of Chinese, so there! - I know that's not the path for me. My relationship with the language has always been more street-level, more everyday, less academic. I *heart* academia, but as an abstract, not as a career goal. At heart I'm a traveler and a networker, an adventure-seeker and an organic learner. I am not a researcher and not someone who believes you can put the strictures on language that so many academics would like to put on it. 

 

Do I aspire to speak more comfortably? Yes. I'm not sure if, after five and a half years, I've missed some benchmark that I could have hit if I'd only studied harder, or if my organic "it happens when it happens and I am learning" approach has done me more good.

I just don't know, but it's all worth thinking about.

So if you, too, are not fluent and wish people would stop asking as though fluent were a concept whose metrics everyone agreed on or as though there was a benchmark, rather than a scale, of fluency -  don't beat yourself up. You're not alone. I'm here, too!

The Chinese Jungle

Photo from this site - please don't sue me

There have been a lot of online petitions and public outcry in the West recently over the treatment Chinese factory workers endure. Most of it, thanks to This American Life, The Daily Show and other outlets, has been directed at Apple, whose products are made in China by vendors and suppliers.

My feelings on this: I agree completely with the sentiment, but activists: UR DOIN IT RONG. Putting pressure on Apple might bring about some small improvements but really it's like threatening the Death Star but letting Palpatine and Darth Vader run amok. 

Don't get me wrong: I agree. Factory workers in China are forced to live horrific lives. Excruciatingly long work days, mind-explodingly boring jobs putting together the same small part hundreds of times a day, all day, every day, dormitories that house more to a room than a cash-strapped college dorm (and those in the same room don't even know each other), bosses who regularly treat workers badly (and have been known to treat female workers like sex objects) - it's truly disgusting. It's something nobody should accept or put up with. It's Upton Sinclair for the 21st Century, and we rich folks with iPhones - yes, I am using "rich" to mean comparatively well-off, not 1% rich - aid and abet it by buying the products and often rewarding the lower prices that inhumane labor practices allow by buying more of the products when prices are lower. I'm totally on board with that. It's a massive, evil thing. I have wanted a new smartphone since my old one was stolen, but I haven't bought one not only because I'm trying to be careful with money, but also because the thought of supporting that system sickens me. 

Of course, every time I buy something made in China or really any developing country, I'm still supporting that system - I can't deny that. 

The thing is, Apple isn't doing this. Apple is surely aware of it, and Apple turns a blind eye to it, yes, but Apple isn't doing it themselves. 

Those employees don't work for Apple - they work for Foxconn, or any of the other vendors and suppliers that Apple has approved  (although Foxconn is the biggest). Apple is not Foxconn. Foxconn is not Apple. Sure, Apple aids and abets Foxconn's treatment of workers in China, but they're not the same company. You can't say "Apple needs to change its labor practices" or "Apple's workers" - they're not Apple's workers. Foxconn needs to change its labor practices - as does pretty much every other manufacturer with plants in Dongguan, Kunshan or anywhere else in China.

It's not even that simple: Apple hires ODM and OEM firms for its various parts - often different components, from speakers to camera modules to touch screens - are made by different companies. This is true of basically every electronic product you buy - the people who actually design and produce the stuff you use aren't Toshiba, Dell, Acer, Apple etc.: they're companies you've never heard of (I'd name names but I actually teach for a lot of these companies and have signed non-disclosure agreements - to say anything that could be perceived as negative about specific ones on this blog could land me in legal trouble or see me out of a job. So I won't - because I'm totally a part of the system too). 

Even they have vendors - a lot of what Foxconn "produces" is actually designed through a complex system of vendors who design and manufacture the components, and a lot of guanxi (networking) is involved in which vendors get which contracts.

What's more, as most people who live in Taiwan know, the design and R&D in these companies tend to happen in offices in Taiwan, where the design and engineering talent seems to be concentrated. The manufacturing happens in China, often at factory sites owned by the Taiwanese companies and headed up by Taiwanese bosses. The guys who design this stuff are Taiwanese, the poor sods in the factories are Chinese, and their Taiwanese bosses often have little sympathy (side note: this is not always true. I teach at companies like these and often have students who are sent to China for long periods to deal with manufacturing issues. A lot of them are good people who agree that working conditions are abysmal and would like to do something about that. Let us not paint them all with the same brush).

So Apple - or whoever - calls up Foxconn to talk production. Foxconn assigns vendor codes to other companies who help design components (although Foxconn doesn't seem to farm out manufacturing, it  does at times farm out design). Those guys are all in Taiwan or occasionally Korea. Their lives are not as horrific as the Chinese factory workers', but they still work terribly long hours - I'd say unfairly long, for relatively little pay - often arriving between 7 and 9am and working until late at night. Sometimes they're lucky and get to go home by 7pm. Often they're in the office later, or bring work home and keep at it until midnight. These guys have sympathy for the horrific lives of the Chinese factory workers, but they're overworked themselves - what can they do? "This is just how it is" is a chorus you often hear repeated in this sad song.

This is why, while my heart is with the activists and those who speak up, deep down I just don't think it will work. Sure, you could put pressure on Apple, but the workers in question don't work for Apple. Apple can put pressure on Foxconn - threatening to change vendors, for instance - and Foxconn can decide whether or not to reform labor practices. It might have some effect, but probably not much, probably diluted, and probably short-lived.

Do you really think, though, that Terry Gou gives a damn about some American hippies whining about labor practices in Chinese factories? I assure you he does not. Terry Gou cares about money. You want to get Apple's attention and by extension Gou's? You stop buying iPhones and other Apple products. You make it clear through a strong PR campaign why it's happening. Then, and only then, might you have some impact on what Foxconn is doing. In the meantime, of course, a lot of engineers  - my students - working for ODM companies in Taiwan get laid off: a sad side effect. Most of them are just working their butts off 15 hours a day to support themselves and their families. Most of them don't want to see Chinese factory workers treated badly, either, but they want iPhones too - most have them - and they don't think there's anything they can do. Partly because "this is just the way things are" and partly because they're overworked too, and partly because their livelihoods are linked more closely to those Chinese factory workers.

And then, if labor practices do improve, prices will go up. We say that's fine, but we're not everyone - sales probably will drop and Foxconn - whom I don't teach for, by the way - will find some other way to cut costs, or secretly go back to treating workers badly and try to do so in less transparent ways, or Apple will find another vendor who does the same thing. Plenty of Chinese workers who wanted to keep their terrible jobs would lose them. A blessing in disguise for some, a ticket to poverty for others.

It gets harder. You can say "well I just won't buy Apple products" but they all do this. HTC has been in the news for overworking its employees (I have no contract with HTC, I should add). Pretty much any electronic product you could buy is produced under conditions just as bad. You can't escape it by buying a dumbphone and giving up your mobile access: those same companies produce the components that go into dumb phones, too. If you want to escape it, you can't have any product whose components were made in China. If we all do this, that means, by extension, putting many of the overworked Taiwanese engineers out of work, too. You, my activist friend, are fucking stuck.  And it blows, it really does.

So how can it change? And how do I feel, being a part of this system?

Well, it probably won't change much at the hands of angry Westerners who want Chinese factory workers to have better jobs and lives - as much as I wish that could make a difference. It's systemic, and so the entire system needs to change. Asia - especially China, but really Asia as a whole - needs to have a worker's revolution not unlike the labor reforms that America went through post-Upton Sinclair. Ideas like "free time", "worker's rights", "fair pay" and "reasonable work responsibilities and hours" need to take hold. As of now, they have not - at least not in Chinese factories.

I don't hold up much hope that such ideas will transmit from the West to factories in China directly. I can't think of two things more different than the job of the person who makes the dingbat that makes something in an iPhone run and the job of the person who owns the iPhone. I can't think of anything more different than their two cultures, lives, life experiences and biases - although their desires and goals are probably fairly similar: after all, everyone wants a good job, good pay, free time and the chance to have a happy life.

I do, however, have some hope that these ideas will start to influence the tech company offices in Taiwan. In some ways, they already have. Taiwanese office workers are well aware of concepts like overtime pay, work-life balance and flex-time. They even get guaranteed maternity leave and a few days of paternity leave (which should be more, but that's a different post) - something Americans don't always get. More and more workers want those things, and more and more hope that once the economy picks up that wages will rise to fairer levels. The ideas are slow to infiltrate, but they are here and I believe they will burrow deeper as time goes on, especially if the economy improves.

From there, you could start to influence the Taiwanese factory bosses. Terry Gou and Cher Wang - who quite literally have had employees work themselves to death, a phrase that's used as a joke in the USA but is deadly serious here - might have an employee mutiny on their hands, or have trouble recruiting good engineers. They might then decide to start treating workers better. From there it could start to seep into China, and things might get better. Maybe. 

In tandem with that, the Chinese economy needs to develop - it needs to reach a point where many of those workers who are quite literally dying of overwork and mistreatment don't need those terrible jobs. Sure, manufacturing will likely be moved again, to another Third World country with abusive labor practices and it'll all start again, but maybe we'll all be more aware by then and it won't take so long to change things.

How do I feel about this? After all, my livelihood comes from working for these companies. I haven't named many names because I teach at many of them, and not only am I legally obligated not to bring up names, but I do respect my students. They are generally good people stuck in a crappy system, just like you and me.

Well, I feel like crap, sometimes, knowing that my salary is also paid, ultimately, off the back of these workers in China. That the Taiwanese companies wouldn't be able to afford the training budgets that pay for my services if they didn't treat the workers in their factories in China like beasts of burden.

I also feel like, as much as I am able, that the only way to make peace with this is to try to be a part of the solution - because this is my job, and I like my students, and I genuinely want them to gain business skills and improve their English so that they, too, can move up to something better, and I wouldn't be any morally cleaner teaching the engineers of tomorrow at some underpaid buxiban job.

It probably doesn't have much effect, but the best I can do is to be a grain of sand. An irritating, noticeable grain of sand in everyone's underpants that agitates and calls for change. I'm not shy in saying, when asked, that I think my students work too hard, that work culture in Asia is seriously. fucked. up. and that it's even worse in China, and hey guys, you know this so keep that in mind if you're ever the boss. I try to "be the change I want to see in the world" - I have a well-paid job and make it clear that my greatest benefit is free time and the ability to structure my own life and have a great deal of freedom. Some students don't really absorb the import of this; others think "great for her but this is how things are in Asia". Some, though, look at me like a light has turned on in their heads: if she can be free and earn a good living, and if she can balance life and work and be satisfied on both fronts, why can't I?  She is not automatically more entitled to it than I am because she is foreign, or white, or a native English speaker. I could do this too, if I really wanted to. Or could I? Could I? Hmm.

If nothing else - because there is nothing else I can do - I try to be an example of how important personal time, fair pay and a good life really is, and how that is worth fighting for. It may not do much now, but the more that this idea gains exposure in Asia, the better. I'm one person, there's not much I can do, and I'm not Asian and don't want to make this all White Man's Burden-y, but it is what I can do.