Related to Japan

A somewhat younger female employee, Q, joined the Taiwan-Japan Industrial Promotion Center at the Institute for Information Industry, originally believing it would be a platform for digital transformation and international cooperation. Unexpectedly, it turned out to be a Taiwanese-style power struggle mixed with a touch of a very “inauthentic” Japanese-style palace intrigue. Deputy Director Hou Jingyi and Deputy Manager Fu Wangqi are closely connected (possibly relatives). They smile and act overly familiar with male colleagues, while the Line group is filled with “XX~” messages all day. Toward women, however, they are critical and cold, and toward Q they display an almost pathological sensitivity and hostility. Fu was not originally part of the group and joined only after Q came in. After joining, Fu immediately aligned with the deputy director and adopted the same attitude, repeatedly targeting Q and even imitating the background photo of a young male colleague, making the workplace atmosphere awkward and uncomfortable.

When Q first joined, the division of work between her and an older part-time worker who started on the same day seemed extremely unfair, and she was often treated like a servant. After she raised objections, Team Leader Lu Jianhao appeared to compromise on the surface but actually held a grudge and gradually showed a tendency toward manipulation and exclusion, such as cutting off communication between colleagues and creating information asymmetry.

What troubled her even more was that her interactions with male colleagues of a similar age were subjected to one-sided stigmatization and suspicion. She was even placed under restrictions such as being “forbidden from contacting” them, turning ordinary interactions between colleagues into something tense and unnatural. These malicious attempts to target her were widespread, while inappropriate behavior by married personnel such as those described above, which affected the atmosphere and interactions in the office, went unexamined. Her supervisor and HR even abused their authority to monitor her conversation records with colleagues and arbitrarily distort them into sexual-harassment allegations, then refused to accept her gender-equality complaint.

On one occasion, the supervisor even asked to borrow her computer—in a unit that prides itself on digital transformation, a supervisor asking an employee to lend them a computer really resembled a circus performance. Afterwards, the supervisor deleted her calendar access on the grounds of “personal data.” This could be described as using personal data as a moral pretext for bullying, while the underlying double standard showed that personal-data protection was not genuinely valued.

When she sought assistance from HR and the Gender Equality Committee, she received cold treatment and retaliatory smears. On the very day she filed a complaint, she was suddenly removed from the office and forced to work remotely. Her access to calendars and meetings was blocked, and her in-person work was completely restricted. Her duties were downgraded to support tasks, and she was pushed out of the workplace’s social circle—made invisible and humiliated.

The complaint did not lead to a resolution; instead, she was “designated as the respondent in an investigation.” Watching them manipulate the complaint system, smear people in retaliation, and use sexual-harassment allegations to suppress innocent individuals, she truly felt that it was a waste of complaint resources. As for the deputy director, she apparently imagined that she had an ambiguous relationship with a young male colleague, then turned around and accused the young female employee she had bullied of bullying her.

The Labor Department also brushed the matter aside as a “civil dispute” with a verbal admonition, handling it as a teacher might deal with elementary-school students.

For women, young people, and those who value systems and responsibilities, entering such a semi-official-looking organization requires careful consideration. The supervisor who appeared harmless during the interview was actually skilled at disguising PUA-style control with a smile. As the deputy director’s puppet, he watched her mood and busied himself suppressing young women. He appeared to bear a grudge after being reminded about his bad breath and haphazard division of work, and seemed determined to retaliate.

Many people in the group appeared to be in poor mental states. Some lacked a sense of boundaries, some were enthusiastic about emotional infidelity, and some believed they were playing antisocial games within the system, when in reality they were merely slacking off and drawing a salary, wasting social resources. People who focus on doing their work usually do not look particularly cheerful. Of course, I had no reason to put on a pleasant face in such an environment either.

Even after her complaint failed, she continued to be stigmatized and made invisible until her final day of employment. After the colleague who had once demanded that she be silenced was challenged and was no longer treated as the primary attacker, the team leader again took action, claiming that she had “caused trouble by asking work-related questions” of other men in the group and former friendly members of another group. This misuse of the Japanese etiquette of not causing others trouble—copied and weaponized—became behavior that confused and offended others. As in the past, colleagues’ communications were maliciously distorted, employees’ privacy was violated, and she was harmed and isolated. Ironically, the person being excluded was someone who was socially skilled and attractive.

In fact, she had merely been arbitrarily prohibited from interacting with certain people, so she discussed work with other colleagues instead; nearly all of those collaborators happened to be men, something she could not choose. This staffing arrangement was precisely the result of the deputy director, her inner circle, and the team leader’s long-standing gender-based manipulation.

Finally, a reminder: Anyone planning to file a complaint in this kind of environment should understand that internal channels are mostly just for “going through the motions,” so it is unwise to expect much. When being suppressed or retaliated against, hold on until the time is right, then seek external or judicial avenues. After all, this culture of protecting insiders and oppression is unlikely to be eradicated in the short term.

Since last year, several members have experienced mental-health problems. The Institute for Information Industry itself also uses the complaint system to help suppress people targeted by supervisors.