Politicians should not use sign language as fodder for jokes

◎ Guo Suo

Recently, a video of Chen Zhihan and her husband Xu Fu discussing political topics was circulated on the Internet. Chen Zhihan gestured with "North" and "Seven" and then combined them to form "North Seven" as a political mockery, while Xu Fu laughed on the side. Even if we do not arbitrarily conclude that the two men subjectively wanted to humiliate the hearing-impaired, the problem still exists. Sign language is not a physical joke used by politicians to prank their opponents, but an important language for many deaf and hard-of-hearing people to communicate, receive information, and participate in society on a daily basis. When people who are preparing to participate in elections and fight for public power turn this language into material for making fun of political opponents, what is really exposed is not the sense of humor, but the lack of due sensitivity to disadvantaged situations and language equality.

Chen Zhihan, director of the People's Party Legislative Yuan Caucus, and her husband Xu Fu were criticized for laughing and joking with "Northern Seven" during a live broadcast together. (Extracted from Xu Fu’s Square Grid/YT)

What’s even more ironic is that this controversy occurred in the aftermath of the sheltered workshop order controversy. Previously, in the Legislative Yuan's related budget offense and defense, Blue and White formed the voting result with 57 votes, which subsequently triggered controversy over the impact of the Mid-Autumn Festival procurement and sheltered factory orders of the Presidential Palace. Politicians can of course advocate budget cuts, and they can also ask administrative agencies to justify each expenditure, but before pressing the voting machine, they should know how many people's work may be behind a budget. For ordinary politicians, it may be just a budget item, an offense and defense, or a voting record; for people with disabilities working in sheltered workshops, it may be an order, a job, and the dignity of proving that they can participate in society through labor. Now that the storm is not far away, we see politicians' families using sign language to create laughter. Although the two incidents are different in nature, they inevitably make people ask again, where do politicians place the vulnerable in public value?

Please read on...

Politicians, in particular, are not qualified to use "just joking" as a universal excuse to shirk responsibility. An ordinary person's wrong words may only affect a few people around him; a politician's words can set a public example, and his vote is more likely to directly affect the allocation of resources. If we don’t understand the importance of sign language to deaf culture today, and when we enter parliament tomorrow to face the budget for sign language interpretation, access to information, special education, accessibility, and employment for people with disabilities, how can we trust that he truly understands why these systems exist? Politicians can ridicule Shen Boyang, criticize any political opponent, and even use sharp political language to confront each other, but please directly criticize the other party's policies, words and deeds. There is no need to use the language that disadvantaged groups rely on to communicate to create laughter. This is not political correctness, but the most basic social literacy of a person who is prepared to take over public power.

Taiwanese society should also take this opportunity to re-examine how we treat the vulnerable. We cannot visit sheltered workshops, take photos with disabled friends, and shout about taking care of the vulnerable as soon as the election comes. When we return to political attack and defense, we forget that there are people behind the budget who have lives to live. When we return to the camera, we forget that the language of the disadvantaged should not become entertainment material. True respect is never about sympathy, let alone buying a few boxes of mooncakes during the holidays, but about understanding that everyone has equal rights to work, express, communicate and participate in society. How a politician treats those with a smaller voice in society can best reflect his political value. Sheltered workshop work is not a political prop, and sign language is not a political joke. When politicians themselves have not learned this lesson, why should they ask the people to hand over public power to them?

Sheltered workshop work is not a political prop, and sign language is not a political joke. When politicians themselves have not learned this lesson, why should they ask the people to hand over public power to them? (File photo)

(The author is a freelance reviewer)