Q: The title of your book is rather distinctive. Why don't you explain the book's title for us. Also, you cite a number of academic theories in the book. Did you have any particular readership in mind when you prepared the book? And do you hope to convey some sort of message through it?

Chang Hsiao-hung says, "Feminism doesn't encourage women not to love men. It looks for better ways for both sexes to love.".

What makes "woman"?

A: This book is basically about "postmodern feminism." It is a product of the connection between postmodern and feminist thinking, and as such belongs to a school of feminism which is separate from traditional feminism.

Traditional feminism stresses the woman's identification with her true female nature, while postmodern feminism rather mischievously eases women's identification with the "feminine" aspect. Addressing root issues, such as women's likes and dislikes and basic nature, it calls into question how "woman" was formed through culture. In another sense, it stresses moving beyond traditional barriers and models of behavior for the sexes, and attempts to play roles not identified with any one sex in particular. Taking clothing for example, one may dress in a very "feminine" or "masculine" way, or in a way that is both feminine and masculine at the same time. This is why there is a strong sense of playfulness to postmodern feminism and more room for spirited thought.

Things "postmodern" have become quite popular in Taiwan these past few years, but the issue of sex is not usually touched upon in discussions of postmodernism. What I do is to tie these two issues together in my discussion. I love the diagonal slash in the title, because while it can separate the two sides, it also implies the possibility of dialogue and communication between them.

Power, desire, and gender performance are the key terminology used throughout the book. I discuss a number of power relations between the sexes in the book. Generally, when we think of power, raw power of the political kind comes to mind, but the power discussed here is altogether different. What I am attempting to show is that, even in the most intimate human relationships, power relations exist. I am not concerned with interpersonal relationships, but rather questions of the overall social structure as society has a certain arrangement of status and distribution of power between the sexes--a distribution which is essentially lopsided. In addition, desire is often approached together with power, and this is an important part of discussions on issues of the sexes.

In the traditional social structure of imbalanced power, women often have to suppress their needs in order to conform to the ideal of women as selfless and devoted.

Self-fashioning:

In addition, gender performance is a relatively new approach. Gender itself is fashioned through "performance." Performance encompasses a broad degree of meanings, including the process of social conditioning, as in how to dress and think. Yet in the process of conditioning, there is still room for self-fashioning.

The "performance" discussed in the book is basically a part of self-fashioning. In other words, one may consciously strive for what one desires to have and freely play any kind of role. For instance, with fashion, the archetypical "strong woman" wanted to be like a man, so she wore a suit top with shoulder pads over a skirt. This gave her a strong, dynamic appearance. Later, after women attained a more stable position in the workplace, we could make our own choices as to how to dress.

I envisioned my readership to be women with a junior college education or higher. Logically speaking, so-called "gender" issues should be free from class nature; but a lot of people are discussing gender issues in Taiwan now, and these important concepts are being discussed quite well, in familiar, straightforward terms. Still, I think that something on another level should also be explored.

Having found an audience, I have incorporated some rather complex ways of thinking between the lines, while the material may also be somewhat abstruse. It's not that I'm trying to be recondite, but rather that gender issues have their complex side.

The movement to rescue child prostitutes is currently a top concern among feminists in Taiwan. （photo by Chiu Sheng-wang）

Possibilities lurk within popular culture:

The messages I am trying to convey can be discussed in two areas. On the larger level, I hope that through a feminist approach to reading (with a particular audience in mind), readers will find the ideology lurking behind everything--such as with the notions that men are noble and assertive and women are meek and passive, or that "love is everything for women, but just a part of a man's life"--and I hope they learn how these ideologies affect us.

On a more immediate level, I hope to appeal to a group of people through this book. I hope that this group of readers will discover the allure of feminist knowledge and proceed to treat it as something to be studied and practiced. It was the allure of this knowledge and action that captivated me.

Q: In the preface it appears that feminism has had a tremendous impact on you. How did you first cross paths with feminism? And what was the biggest turning point for you?

Romance novels have long been favored by women. One local publishing firm's recent slick advertising campaign to push this form of entertainment shows that romance never goes out of style.

Shakespeare and feminism

A: I first encountered feminism in my second year of graduate school. The earliest inspiration I received from it was in academic research, as it allowed me to see additional possibilities in traditional literary scholarship--possibilities for criticism. Taking Shakespeare's Hamlet for example, traditional criticism approaches this work from philosophical, psychological, or political angles, but feminism takes a whole new set of critical weapons to its analysis as it seeks to find what problems Hamlet's mother had, his girlfriend Ophelia had, and why when he couldn't take revenge for his father he imagined himself as a woman? These questions provide new concepts for literary scholarship.

Next, encountering feminism gave me the chance to read works by woman writers that I would never have read in traditional literature courses. Their works are excellent, but because of their status as women they haven't been recognized by society, or because men dominate the selection of works they have failed to include them among the classics.

The excitement prompted by feminism is not limited to the academic level; it extends into everyday life as well.

Revolution from within

From an early age I was always the kind of person who did what was expected of me. I often kid myself, saying that I am "slightly romantic, and only cautiously out of Line." In the past, I was very irresolute: I lacked my own opinions and stands on many issues.

Feminism challenged a lot of deep-seated notions of mine. For instance, I used to think that women shouldn't be good talkers, shouldn't attract too much attention, and that we should be soft and understanding; but now I see these as self-limitations. At the time, though, I not only subscribed to these notions, but I also practiced them. In order to depart from these things, I must compel myself in every aspect of my life to think, and to turn this thought into action.

Feminism also allowed me to see that behind the workings of so-called "ideology" lie a set of power relations. With this knowledge, I began to have my own views and stands on many issues. Plus, my concern for gender issues extended to other issues, such as those of class and race. The driving force behind my concern was feminism.

Q: In the book you mention that feminists denounce the patriarchal values transmitted repeatedly in TV dramas, romance novels, and popular songs, and that most women are lost among these things and attain pleasure and satisfaction from them. But feminists are at odds with them. Why it there such a gap separating feminists and the average woman? Also, you say that in the past feminists separated themselves from and neglected popular culture, but today they are willing to take pains to concern themselves with popular culture. What catharsis brought about such a change?

Women removed from feminism?

A: Actually, all feminists, as part of their cultural experience, have at one time or another taken pleasure in popular culture, but the reason that they eventually discarded such diversions is that their feminine consciousness was awakened. The awakening of such consciousness is an important concept of feminism.

In the past, students of feminism were reluctant to confront women's affection for popular culture, as they believed that this was tainted consciousness and dismissed it as such. Their way of dismissing it was to completely remove themselves from it, but most women are unable to do that. And since most women are unable to part with their affections, they simply cut themselves off from feminism.

Later scholarship stressed confronting these likes. Basically, popular culture is something amorphous that is hard to get a clear handle on. This is what often causes women to balk during the process of reform, as most women cannot let go of it. What is to be done? At this time, feminists must confront their inner struggles and conflicts.

The reason the book combines scholarship on sex and culture is that from an early age I was a loyal consumer of pop culture. I would talk about TV dramas, romance novels, and love songs because those things enchanted me. I love to sing love songs--when I use thought training to analyze love songs, I am actually looking within my own self. I also discuss weight loss because I was quite corpulent at one time, and I still take pains to get in a fixed amount of exercise each week to keep myself from getting fat again. I also talk about reproduction politics, because I am at the age where people start putting on the pressure and asking me if I'm going to have a baby. I begin to ponder the entire meaning of motherhood in this society. These are issues which genuinely concern me and perplex me, and in order to find the answers I look for information to mull over and d discuss. I think the most important thing is for me to let the reader witness my personal struggle and growth.

Actually, the new generation of feminists do not want women to remove themselves from their likes and dislikes, but rather seek to understand what captivates them as this can reveal what women are lacking.

Women are constantly caught between their families and their careers. Setbacks when it comes to promotions at work and in other issues in everyday life make women depressed and fatigued. They might think that theirs is a bitter lot in life, but women's weariness is rooted in culture's arrangement of the sexes; requiring women to take on the majority of domestic burdens is a kind of structural inequity. We hope that women can find out where their true problems lie: they can keep on singing love songs and reading romance novels, but they should also develop a kind of "passionate detachment"; that is, at they enjoy these products of popular culture, they should have a new awareness.

Flashy methods of protest

Q: You seem to have a fondness for the subject of Madonna the singer, as you feel that she represents the complexities and ambiguities of postmodern culture. You are also quite a fan of her unbridled performing style. As well, in the chapter entitled "Flamboyantly Flouting Convention" you discuss nonconformity in popular culture as a means for developing "flashy methods of protest." Why is it that flashiness can be a method of protest? Are these tactics of fighting against traditional male hegemony suitable for all women?

A: Flamboyancy is unquestionably a means of protest. Tradition wants women to be quiet and know their place, but some people these days don't accept the restrictions that have been foisted upon them, but rather attempt to realize other possibilities. This is a workable method.

I think Madonna is bold and brilliant. She is a totally unrestrained woman. It is so rare for a woman to be so uninhibited and free, and her "don't tread on me" performing style has won her a lot of room for maneuvering. I'm not saying that everyone should be outrageous like her, but I think that from her example we can see how women can learn to gain more resources. She is a figure to be observed by women; it's only of secondary importance whether one wants to take her lead or not.

As for noncomformity, this is also merely a form of protest, and this method is most certainly tied into class interests. What I mean by this is that women from different classes have different strategies available to them.

Protest is not just taking to the streets:

In Taiwan protest immediately brings to mind street marches and banners. But in everyday life we are actually constantly engaging in protest, only we are not directly aware of it.

As far as women are concerned, revolution is not really that far away. It's Like saying that when a woman learns how to drive or suddenly dresses up outrageously one day, in one sense she has started on the road to revolution, because taking control of the steering wheel is a watershed in our personal experience.

I think that the beauty of feminism it that it teaches that all reform begins in the nitty gritty details of life, and in our likes and dislikes and our outlook on life.

Q: The popularity of feminism seems to have affected the consumer market. Books on how to be a consummate professional woman, a strong woman, or books like How to Be a Ladylike Woman have become a major force in the publishing market. Television in Taiwan also has the program "Women, Women" devoted to the fairer sex. Seemingly overnight, women are being showered attention like never before, but is the media's approach to these issues and resolving these issues basically compatible with the ideas stressed by feminists?

Highly practical, palpable feminism

A: They're quite different, but that isn't to say they can be discounted. The women's issues discussed in your average consumer culture do actually satisfy the needs of some women. Basically, they take a rather moderate approach which seeks harmony between the sexes. This is relatively free of conflict and fire, which is safer for many women. Also, they provide professional women with a lot of expedient solutions for resolving the problems we encounter in our everyday lives. These are highly practical tools.

Still, I find some danger in this, in that they use rather compromised means to safeguard the woman's place in the current order, rather than touching on structural issues. By compromise, I mean that they raise the issues but look for traditional solutions.

In the final analysis, it is nevertheless a good thing whenever gender issues are raised and discussed. We do not want to see them remain nonissues.

Furthermore, the fact that feminist issues have attracted notice indicates a newly emerging feminist force. Women have an increasingly prominent voice, their own concerns, and we have begun to demand that these issues be discussed or that we discuss our own problems.

[Picture Caption]

p.98

Chang Hsiao-hung says, "Feminism doesn't encourage women not to love men. It looks for better ways for both sexes to love."

p.100

In the traditional social structure of imbalanced power, women often have to suppress their needs in order to conform to the ideal of women as selfless and devoted.

p.101

The movement to rescue child prostitutes is currently a top concern among feminists in Taiwan. (photo by Chiu Sheng-wang)

p.102

Romance novels have long been favored by women. One local publishing firm's recent slick advertising campaign to push this form of entertainment shows that romance never goes out of style.