Amma's Kitchen and other Indian food updates

Over the past few weeks, I've been slowly chipping away at the list of Indian restaurants I have or had not been to so as to keep my Indian food in Taipei list as personally vetted as possible. With that in mind, I went out of my way to eat at Amma's Kitchen, Jai Ho (Tianmu - by the owners of the erstwhile Fusion Asia) and Masala Art (Maji Maji in Yuanshan).

I've also added Moksha and Azeez Indian to the master list, although I haven't been to either.

Masala dosa from Amma's Kitchen

I especially want to plug Amma's Kitchen, so here's my review copied from my main review page fro your convenience:

Amma's Kitchen

#2 Lane 357 Heping East Road Sec. 2, Da'an District Taipei 106
106台北市大安區和平東路二段357巷2號
MRT Technology Building 

Update: Amma's has moved! 

Amma's new address is above, in a small lane off Heping East Road, a short walk from MRT Technology Building (the closest bus stops would be National Taipei University of Education or Wolong Street). 

The new Amma's is larger, and no longer a single long room in a decrepit building but a street-level restaurant. It's all-around nicer, with more tables and is already popular. 

Amma still excels at South Indian tiffin and indeed is one of the few places in Taiwan where it is available. It might be the only place in Taiwan where you can get pongal (a ghee, curry leaf, pepper and ginger flavored mound of cooked moong daal and rice) - if you call ahead. The Thali (below) has dosa but I honestly don't think even they would do pongal.

Their dosas are delicious and their podi idli is still one of my favorite items. It's still South Indian-run and still has the look, smell and flavor of a restaurant in Tamil Nadu. I love that the coffee is served in South Indian-style tumblers with bowls, a style of coffee drinking I came to love while living in Madurai. 

There is a 'but', however. 

Amma used to also serve excellent curries, including the only good (perhaps the only) Chettinad chicken and Chicken 65 available in Taiwan. Having recently been to Chettinad and having lived in Tamil Nadu before, I know Chettinad chicken when I eat it. It's a distinctively pungent, spicy chicken curry. 

Now, sadly, the spice and distinctiveness of the non-tiffin curries (North Indian staples like aloo gobi) are gone. We visited twice shortly after they opened in their new location, once for tiffin - which again, was excellent - and once for more regular curries. While the lemon rice was still amazing, it seemed as though every curry had the same sauce. Granted, the sauce was delicious (though not very spicy), but it was the same sauce on everything, including the aloo gobi, which is supposed to be more of a dry fried curry, not sitting in a gravy. That exact same sauce appeared with the Chettinad chicken, which simply wasn't Chettinad chicken. The coconut chutney, too, lacked flavor - it was really just wet coconut, no curry leaf, mustard seed or anything else you'd put in a proper South Indian coconut chutney. The masala vadai were similarly less flavorful, though the texture was perfect. 

We were told that Taiwanese apparently prefer the less spicy curry - okay, but the same sauce, delicious as it is, on everything? - and that if we wanted real Chettinad chicken we would have to ask in advance or ask for "spicy". 

Okay, but honestly, I shouldn't have to ask. It would be much better to make it properly as a default and ask customers if they want it dumbed down. Don't make the dumbed-down kind and act surprised when people expected something authentic. In any case, unless I call ahead, it's not possible to change a bog-standard gravy into Chettinad chicken. By the time I've sat down and ordered, the damage is already done and adding chili powder won't fix it.



I want these guys to succeed, so I do encourage everyone to patronize their restaurant. I love the idea of idli and dosa just a short walk from my home! Just stick to tiffin or call in advance to let them know you want the real deal. 

* * *


That aside, recently I've been struggling with the Indian food writers' dilemma of late - namely, do I tell them the level of heat I want in my food or do I see what they bring me without special instructions, to find out how they envision their own food? 

The old Amma's Kitchen

As you know - and if you don't know stop reading my blog right now and go jump in a well - different Indian dishes have different levels of spice that are appropriate for the gravy and whatever's been cooked in it. A vindaloo should be so hot it gets you high, with a nice vinegary kick. Channa masala has an afterburn created by a mash of hot green chilis at its base. Butter chicken should be warming but not too hot, balanced with creamy sweetness and tomatoey..ness. Almost like you caramelized the tomatoes before adding the cream. Any sort of methi-based curry (methi paneer, aloo methi) should have appropriate heat to balance out the strong flavor of methi leaves. Actually anything with potato must be good and hot - a good aloo gobi is a bit dry, just a nice coating with the potatoes just giving you a mouth-gasm because they've been fried in ghee, and the cauliflower not too crunchy, but cooked and maybe a bit charred hear and there. Just enough spicy gravy to have something to sop up with rice or naan. A good shahi paneer or malai kofta is warm and creamy and nutty, not too hot. My personal favorite home curry - a Bengali concoction of coconut milk, mustard seed, mustard oil, fried green chilis and heaps of coriander - heats you up from several sources of spice.

Every curry is different, but you should always leave an Indian meal with the feeling that you've been warmed to your bones. 

So, the question remains - do I ask for that, or do I see what they bring me? Do they understand? Do they have The Knowledge? I used to go with the latter - seeing what came - because I want to know what the chef is thinking when she or he creates. It's a great window into how seriously they take their craft. But recently I've been going with the former and being explicit about what I want, because I feel I ought to give any place I review the chance to do as well as possible. Bias for best and all that. If a place can deliver based on instructions you give them, that's good enough. Anyway, I simply must accept that I live in a country where - whether true or just a long-standing urban legend - people simply do not like their Indian food spicy.

Restaurants can and will tone it down for the local market, so I have to be extremely clear that I am not the local market, don't feed me that. That won't warm you. That's just normal food with like a few extra flavors in it. It won't make you understand.

The (very good) samosas at Masala Art

With that in mind, I have to say that while both Jai Ho and Masala Art are fine...the food was well-made, they have great stuff on the menu like paan kulfi and homemade gulab jamun (at Jai Ho) and falooda (at Masala Art - which is good because they don't have beer) - the food is just not spicy enough.

I'm sorry, it's just not. The flavors are balanced. The ingredients are quality. Whoever is back there knows what he or she is doing. But it's not spicy enough. 

I wouldn't be bothered about this, except I specifically asked them to make it good and hot for me. Told them I used to live in India (I studied abroad there - close enough). Told them everyone at the table could handle real heat. We'd all been to India and liked it at that spice level (which won't burn your tongue off, contrary to popular myth. As above - every gravy is different.) Told them not to hold back.

In both cases...it just didn't get there.

I don't know about Masala Art - if anything, the butter chicken was hotter than the channa masala, which is odd, and the butter chicken was great. The samosas were too. Big fan of the falooda. The channa masala was the only thing lacking (well - and the garlic naan was made with garlic powder, not fresh garlic, but I liked that it was thin). But at Jai Ho I said something about it, and the waitress admitted she'd just put in our orders for "medium spicy" (which by Taiwan standards means "not freakin' spicy at all"). Which would have been an excusable mistake, except I'd very clearly specified that that was not what I wanted.

I think the chefs at both restaurants know how to make a good curry. I just...

...well, I hope they listen to me next time. And yes, there will be a next time.

If you're reading this, Jai Ho and Masala Art - when we say hot, we mean it. You probably didn't know this when I ate at your establishments, but I can quite likely match your own chefs curry for curry from my own kitchen. I don't mean "oh I can make a daal", I mean I see your butter chicken and raise you a Hyderabadi mutton biryani. I see your aloo gobi and raise you pumpkin in tamarind-sambar gravy. I see your channa masala and raise you a Bengali shorshe murgi. I only go out for Indian so I can keep that master list updated - think of it as a community service - and so I don't have to do it myself if I'm feeling lazy. If I say hot, I mean hot.

Paan kulfi at Jai Ho

Make it appropriately hot for the dish - that's how you get to the top of the list. (Mayur is at the top because he and his chefs do a good job with this.)

(But seriously I really liked the desserts at both places. Keep it up.)

Onion uthappam at Amma's Kitchen

From The Island of Women to #MeToo: my latest for MyTaiwanTour

Years ago, I was an administrative assistant at a perfectly okay company. Every year our perfectly okay branch president gave us generous gifts - usually fairly hefty gift certificates - for "Administrative Professionals' Day", which is the rebranded way of saying Secretary's Day without it coming off as quite so demeaning. Because I was not well-paid - I could barely pay my rent and couldn't save at all until I got a second job - I couldn't afford a quality professional wardrobe, so I always used my gift certificate on that.

It was nice enough to receive recognition for the okay job I did (I was no all-star, mostly because I just didn't like the work very much, but that's on me) at this okay company. I was grateful for the gift itself.

But on some level, regarding the holiday, it felt like a consolation. Sorry you're doing a job you don't want for low pay. Sorry that most corporate jobs are just "okay". Sorry that, while there is room for growth, none of the  jobs you might get promoted to are great either. Sorry that to even get those better jobs you still don't want, you have to not only do amazing work at a job you are not suited for, but you also have to pretend you love it. Sorry you can't save anything so you can't afford to do us and yourself a favor and quit so we can find someone who wants the job and you can find work you care about. Sorry that what you actually want to do, despite being more meaningful, doesn't offer the same route to financial security. Sorry. Here's a gift certificate. 
I didn't want to be recognized for Administrative Professionals' Day. I didn't want the day to apply to me at all, because I didn't want to be an "administrative professional".

Yes, this sounds whiny, but I was in my early twenties. Life is better now.

I'm telling you this because I often get the same feeling about Women's Day, which was yesterday.

So, I didn't write anything about it here yesterday because, to be honest, I just wasn't feelin' it. I know all the arguments for the existence of the day, I don't disagree, and I even went to last year's march.

But this year it feels like a consolation prize - like, "we can't stop the world from being so horribly sexist, so here's a holiday for you? Sorry? Now let's talk about some inspirational women who were also crushed under the eternal wheel of patriarchy."

Eh. I don't want a holiday. I don't want a radio program about inspirational women who were never recognized by a sexist society, because I want such cases to cease to happen in the future.  I want there to be no need for one on the first place.

With that in mind, but trying to be a bit more upbeat - lol - I did write something for MyTaiwanTour's Taiwan Scene. I like the final product more than I thought I would - It's not overly optimistic but tries to find the gold amid the rubble, which just about reflects how I'm feeling these days.

"The Island of Women" was once meant to be an insult, a backhanded way to call a place uncivilized or savage (as compared to the "civilized" repressive patriarchy of China, especially from the late Han dynasty onward). Now, I hope Taiwan can take that heritage, passed down from indigenous women who had more autonomy and routes to leadership than their Chinese counterparts have historically had, and use it to its advantage to lead Asia in the fight for women's equality.

I have my doubts at times, though - the old democracy movements were heavily influenced by women, but I don't see the same number or visibility of female luminaries in contemporary social movements and activist circles.

So...#metoo? We'll see.

If you're a foreign working woman in Taiwan planning to have kids, you're probably going to get screwed

I'll be expanding this more in the coming weeks, but I feel like I need to say something now, however short and underdeveloped.

If you are a foreign woman working in Taiwan, and you are intending to have children here, there is a very high possibility that you're not only going to get screwed by your employer, but that it's already happening.

A huge percentage of foreign workers here - even the "foreign professionals" - work jobs that pay an hourly rate. The vast majority of these jobs are cram school/buxiban jobs (some of which pay a salary, but many/most don't.) (Most of these jobs are not remotely professional, even though they ought to be, and are poorly paid by real professional standards, but that's a different discussion.)

We're already getting screwed out of benefits we're meant to have, such as paid typhoon days and national holidays. Employers - private language schools, mostly - just don't provide them, and good luck leaving and finding another job that does.

Well, here's another benefit workers - even foreign workers on hourly pay - are meant to have: paid maternity leave. Your employer is meant to calculate your estimated hourly pay during your absence and, well, pay you that.

But how much you get paid for maternity leave depends partly on how long you've been employed there, and partly on labor insurance, or 勞保. To get the paid maternity leave benefit, you must be signed up for labor insurance.

And most private language schools that employ foreign teachers never do this.

I have heard varying accounts of whether labor insurance is required by law for foreign employees. Notably, however, it is absolutely not true that an employer can choose not to offer it. An employer telling you "we don't offer labor insurance", and then insisting they don't have to, even if you want it, is lying to you. They typically try to evade the issue by simply not telling you it's an option, hoping you'll never find out that if you ask for it, by law they have to register you.

If you do ask...well, results vary. I typically say good things about my various employers, save one really bad experience I had. They've been, for the most part, a cut above the typical clown academy here in Taiwan. But I'm going to go ahead and say a few critical words now:

At one school where I taught exam prep classes (I've since left for unrelated reasons), I was first ignored when I asked about labor insurance, then told they "don't offer it". I replied that they had no choice, they ignored me again. I said that if I was not signed up for it, I would report this issue to the government. I didn't particularly want to report anything to anyone, but I kept getting stonewalled when trying to access my rights. Then they acted as though this made me the "problem" or "high-maintenance" employee (it didn't - I just wanted what I was legally entitled to and kinder, more private entreaties were ignored.) I got my labor insurance. Others are not so lucky - I can handle being unfairly thought of as "difficult", because at least I won, but not everyone wins.

The problem is, most foreigners either don't know they are entitled to this, think it's something the company can "offer" rather than something that cannot be denied them, or don't realize that it matters. So most working foreign women here have a safety net they don't necessarily even realize they ought to have.

So if you're a foreign woman here, and you decide to pop out a screamer, whether or not you get paid maternity leave - which you are entitled to by law even if you are on an hourly wage - depends entirely on whether or not you signed up for labor insurance. If you didn't sign up, no paid vagina-healin', baby-wranglin' time for you. If you let the issue slide when your employer refused to sign you up, same deal. You just got screwed.

What's worse is that even if you are signed up for labor insurance, a huge number of schools underreport income (my former exam prep institute employer sure did). You might think this isn't a big deal, that "that's how it is here", but your labor insurance is based on your reported income, so if you get pregnant and take maternity leave, the pay you are entitled to matches the craptastic income that's been reported for you, not what you actually earned.

I have also heard stories of schools being reluctant to grant maternity leave even if their employees have labor insurance, although that hurdle can often be gotten over if you are willing to call (or threaten to call) some relevant authorities. They might try to screw you in other ways, though (e.g. extending your probation for vague reasons that don't quite make sense to justify paying you less).

Of course, Taiwanese women face massive issues accessing maternity leave too, something that seems to be rarely written about. Most of what I see in English consists of lavish praise of Taiwan's maternity leave policies - and at least compared to the USA (which is a legitimate horror show in this regard) - which rarely includes the uncomfortable truth that, while employers can't exactly deny their employees this leave, they can and do pressure them to take as little of it as possible and find other passive-aggressive ways to punish female employees who don't comply. Plenty of Taiwanese women don't feel they can access their full legally-entitled maternity leave either.

There is a difference, though: Taiwanese women know this is a problem. They are at least aware of what they are supposed to be getting. There is a foundation there for fighting back.

Foreign women in Taiwan? They may not even realize they're getting screwed. But chances are, they are.

Opening China to Taiwanese films: it's a trap

Or, please consider this your daily reminder to never, ever trust the Chinese government, ever. They never do anything 'benevolently', at least when it comes to Taiwan. There is always an underlying motive. The CCP is evil, not stupid.

So what could the motive be for lifting restrictions on the Chinese market for Taiwanese films?

Frankly, it's the same reason why they allow so many Chinese students into Taiwan, and have made Taiwanese universities sign "memoranda of understanding" that certain topics the CCP doesn't like won't be discussed. It didn't seem like much was happening as a result, and the topics were not actually banished from Taiwanese university classrooms, but the point was, China could have started insisting on enforcement whenever it wanted, and if this or that university refused, no more revenue stream from Chinese students' tuition for them! Good idea to get them good and dependent on it, first, of course.

The article itself, despite its laughable breakdown of history (the same old risible "since 1949" nonsense), contains this answer within it:


An Fengshan, spokesman for China’s Taiwan Affairs Office said: “Taiwanese compatriots can share in the opportunities arising from China’s economic development.”


Yo, An Fengshan can cho - - - oh yeah, I'm trying to be less vulgar about serious topics.

Ahem. Anyway.

The translation of An's foetid garbage talk is this: when Taiwanese movies become more popular thanks to wider distribution in China and Taiwanese film production companies start to feel more dependent on Chinese revenue, the Chinese government will start placing demands - enforcing harsher censorship rules, trying to control which stars can appear in which movies, that sort of thing. Shutting down productions they don't like by suddenly having a problem with the Taiwanese crew they were allowed to come in with.

It's just another way to try and control Taiwan's media output. 

Not wanting to spend the time/money/resources to make two versions of the same film or lose potential sales by casting "unwelcome" stars who do not parrot Beijing's propaganda, companies will just start self-censoring from the get-go to stay in the Chinese market. So we in Taiwan will end up watching Taiwanese movies with more of a CCP-approved Chinese twist.

Then there's this:


Similarly, reducing the numerical limits on Taiwanese talent, is unlikely to mean complete derestriction. China has actively excluded Taiwanese performers who it considers politically undesirable. In 2016, producers of “No Other Love” were ordered to remove veteran Taiwanese actor Leon Dai from the film which was in post-production at the time. Dai fell foul of mainland authorities by not being clear enough over his stance on Taiwanese independence.


Pro-Taiwan actors and other film industry workers will find themselves short of roles. Stars that want to stay bankable will start touting CCP-approved trash. Some might try to "stay out of politics" to avoid threatening their livelihoods, but the Chinese troll mob will crow that this is not good enough, and they will feel public pressure to actively speak out in Beijing-friendly ways. This already happens with stars who aren't trying to be political (even Chinese ones) so don't think it won't start happening on an even larger scale. 
And then we will have a whole crop of Taiwanese stars who are publicly pro-China and anti-Taiwan no matter how they actually feel. This will certainly affect public morale in Taiwan, exactly as it is meant to.

Again. Never trust the Chinese government. Ever. Not ever. Especially when it comes to Taiwan, they can never, ever be taken at face value. Everything they do is in service to their greater goal of annexation.

Oh and seriously An Fengshan can choke on a fat one. 

Sorry, couldn't help myself. 

#notsorry

I'm in this month's Centered on Taipei!

The March 2018 issue of Centered on Taipei is the "women's issue" - I wrote a piece about shuttling between multiple identities as a foreign woman in Taiwan - likening it to being a human version of a Newton's Cradle which you can read on page 32.

To read the magazine, click on the cover photo in the link.

A Perfect Storm

Taiwan, a self-governed island which China claims as a part of its territory, has seen a sharp spike in diarrhea cases just as it is facing a toilet paper shortage.

This toilet paper shortage is the largest experienced in Taiwan since the Nationalists fled to the de facto autonomous territory in 1949.

China, which views Taiwan as a renegade province to be eventually reunited with the Mainland, has so far not commented, seemingly allowing local authorities on the island to handle the diarrhea outbreak and toilet paper shortages directly.

Taiwan's current leader, Tsai Ying-wen, has also refrained from comment. However, Premier William Lai has asked residents of the disputed region to remain calm, assuring all Chinese in Taiwan that toilet paper supplies are stable. Tsai and Lai hail from the Democratic Progressive Party, which has traditionally favored Taiwanese independence, a "red line" for Beijing that it warns Taiwan must not cross.

The Taiwanese local government - formally known as the Republic of China, and which has not renounced its claims on the Mainland since the end of the Chinese Civil War - has announced an investigation into whether major supermarket chains and paper manufacturers colluded to create a market rush, which may ratchet up tensions with the People's Republic of China. This is following the government's 2016 refusal to acknowledge the 1992 consensus in which both sides agreed there was "One China", but each with its own interpretation, a move which considerably increased tensions and was seen as a provocation of Beijing.


* * *


Dear International Media:

THIS IS HOW YOU SOUND WHEN YOU WRITE ABOUT TAIWAN.

Sincerely,

Lao Ren Cha

Talking about Taiwan's 'Chinese identity' begs the question

Interesting editorial piece in the Hong Kong Free Press, actually from 2017, but I've just come across it today. In it, Hong Kong resident Charlotte Chang eloquently describes her feelings of identifying on a deep level as Chinese, which she says is made difficult by China's attempts at intertwining Chinese cultural and ethnic identity with political identity:


Like them, I feel overwhelmingly defined by Chinese culture and history. But this pride is apparently not enough, compared with what the mainland expects from me as a new member of its monolithic nation state. Now that Hong Kong is a part of the People’s Republic, “patriotism” should be felt for China as nation and political unit; a love of China as heritage is not enough....

As it stands now, the narrow definition of “Chinese-ness” we are asked to internalize leaves no room for a differentiation between culture and politics. Reconciling this conflict—if it is at all possible—will continue to weigh on my conception of what it means to be Chinese and a Hong Kong citizen in the years to come.

This also has relevance to Taiwan. What strikes me about this is how, in a world where one can identify culturally or ethnically as Chinese without necessarily identifying with the PRC or desiring to be a part of China as a single political entity, it would be easier for Hong Kongers (and Taiwanese) who wish to do so. In Taiwan especially, they could say "I am Chinese" without the attendant political baggage that China now insists that must entail.

Few could argue with a more open, inclusive, downright liberal definition that one can affix to being Chinese. In Taiwan, it would allow those who don't want to let go of the cultural and literary traditions they value, which nevertheless come from China, to keep them without feeling pressure to desire Chinese citizenship. It would allow more breathing room for discussions on how and when Chinese and Taiwanese history have intersected, and allow for less defensiveness in discussions of uniquely Taiwanese history and culture. It allows Hong Kongers to talk about sovereignty without feeling as though they have to deny that they are Chinese (which is precisely why the PRC feels such an open definition cannot be allowed). It just gives people more options - it allows people to relate to being Chinese in a similar way to how I relate to being Armenian: there is a wealth of cultural heritage and history there, but I feel no pressure to desire citizenship in Armenia.

This is apparent in the way she relates to Taiwan, which most would appreciate:


When I visit, I can get around by speaking a language related to my native tongue, explore a history that I have a firm basis in understanding yet am not completely well-versed in, and eat food that tastes familiar yet differs from my everyday diet. In short, I can appreciate my affiliation with Taiwanese people and engage with them from a common cultural reference point while respecting our distance as separate political entities.


Yes! See how easy and drama-free this could all be, if not for the meddling of the People's Republic of China?

The PRC cannot permit this, because it suits their agenda to force Hong Kongers - and, in their mind, Taiwanese - to choose. It makes identifying as 'Chinese' a fraught business. If/when Taiwanese (and Hong Kongers) get fed up and say "fine, if being 'Chinese' means we must be a part of 'China', then I guess we aren't Chinese", they are called culture traitors or race traitors by the Chinese troll mob. Some might feel internal conflict, not wanting to give up a desired Chinese identity for political reasons. This also happens when Taiwanese who have never really felt Chinese to begin with say the same thing.

Nevertheless, I have an issue with the way Chang throws Chineseness on Taiwan, as though she gets to decide how Taiwan identifies:


Perhaps this explains why Taiwan is now so popular as a travel destination for Hong Kong visitors: as a Chinese society [emphasis mine], it does not pressure us to feel a political affinity for it, yet still offers a wealth of culturally intimate experiences.

She assumes, because Taiwan shares many cultural facets with China, most Taiwanese have ancestry in China (among other places), and their history has intersected at times, that Taiwanese de facto identify as Chinese, just as she does. This is implicit in her presumption that Taiwan is a "Chinese" society.

Frankly, I have no real problem with this particular piece or its author - generally, I like it (well, her historical claims about Chinese civilization are deeply questionable, but...whatever). But I hear this assumption about Taiwan parroted often, and it's time to challenge it.

In modern liberal thought, it is taken as a given that people can choose to identify how they like - and only the people involved can decide that. Nobody can force an identity on anybody else.

Well, the same is true for Taiwan. Only Taiwanese can decide, collectively, that they are Chinese. It cannot be decided by people in another country, no matter how similar they are ethnically or culturally (which is not as much as you'd think). It cannot be decided by a Hong Konger because "the food is familiar". It can only be decided by them.

Nobody else can force it on them. Not with appeals to ethnicity (which is a human construct - genetic markers are a real thing, but "ethnicity" is a combination of chosen identity, genetics and family history/culture that doesn't reside in our DNA), not with appeals to history (Taiwan has not been Chinese for the vast majority of its history), and not with appeals to culture (which is, again, a construct. Culture and borders often don't align and it has as much to do with identity as it does internal thinking). The only way in which any person can have an identity - whether that's Taiwanese, Chinese, American, Armenian, whatever - is if they choose it.

If, under a politically open construct, many Taiwanese decide they are Chinese, obviously they have that right. But if they don't - and I know many Taiwanese who don't, never have and never will, no matter how open the definition is - nobody can or should change that. How other people feel doesn't matter.

This is what irks me about the whole "you don't understand the relationship between Taiwan and China because you don't understand what it means to be Chinese!" line of thinking (which is not what Chang was doing in her generally good piece, I just hear it a lot). The rationalization for this is that 'being Chinese' is different, in terms of identity, from other sorts of identity (like, say, how I can identify as both Armenian and American, as well as someone whose home is Taiwan) - usually with the idea that it has some sort of stronger pull or that there are distinct ethnic or cultural boundaries to 'being Chinese' that cannot be violated. This of course is not true - not only are millions of PRC citizens 'not Chinese' under this definition, but a large chunk of Vietnam is Chinese - it's all a construct, created for political gain.

But that begs the question - forget the shaky rationale behind the assumption that 'being Chinese' is somehow different from being anything else. It's wrong, but that's not the point. The point is, when you apply it to Taiwan, you are begging the question. You are assuming from the outset that Taiwan is Chinese, and therefore all of these assumptions and suppositions you have about 'being Chinese' therefore must apply to Taiwan, and therefore one cannot argue that Taiwan is not Chinese, because of 'what it means to be Chinese', but you are the one who decided Taiwan was Chinese in the first place.

In this scenario, you are still deciding someone else's identity for them so that you can push your assumptions about that identity on them.

The reasoning is so circular, it literally hurts my head.

Why so many Westerners, in particular, buy this line of reasoning is beyond me, but I think it stems from a well-meaning, but in this particular case misguided, desire to seem respectful of other cultures. When of course it just means agreeing with Chinese political propaganda and not being respectful at all of Taiwanese culture and identity. When it comes from people who do identify as Chinese, it reeks of trying to force an identity on another group, just because you want them to be a certain way - without caring whether or not they agree. This may be well-meaning (I know a wonderful Chinese person who had to be convinced, after many conversations, that nobody but the Taiwanese can decide what the Taiwanese are) or it may be politically motivated - the only real difference is that the former group can often be convinced.

Or, in a sentence: if Taiwanese decide they are not Chinese - and generally, most identify as Taiwanese - then "what it means to be Chinese" is not relevant to Taiwan,  because Taiwan isn't Chinese.

Even if Taiwanese decide they are Chinese, they still get to define what that means to them. No outside entity can force their own definitions on Taiwan.