在台灣，法律的近代化經常被理解為是邁向文明進化的必經之道，是朝向性別平等邁進的進化史。本文所要挑戰的正是這樣的進化史論述。以法律上祭祀和繼承的分化為主軸，本文探究此分化過程的性別政治，反省台灣法律的近代化如何在法律東方主義的陰影下，交疊著殖民宰制與被殖民者的抵抗與屈從而展開，以及在不同的歷史階段中，女性作為策略性的行動者，又如何在不同的制度規範下展現局部主體性。清帝國法下結合祭祀與財產、以房為單位的「承繼」概念，將女性視為「外人」，僅在例外的情況之下才得以承受家產，例外的縫隙使得作為外人的女性得以在有限制的條件下實踐抵抗。在日本殖民統治的舊慣建構過程中，祭祀與財產繼承產生了初步的分化，並且逐漸趨向於個人化，這樣的發展一方面改造了性別關係，另方面也展現了法律東方主義的政治。而中華民國民法則在近代歐陸法的框架下，以個人財產取代家產的概念、將祭祀排除於法律規範之外，並賦予女性和男性相同的繼承權。雖然制度的改變使得女性實踐能動性的空間大為增加，但形式上的相同權利卻未真正實現實質的性別平等，法律東方主義下「封建遺習」與「進步法律」的對立，更侷限了改革的可能性，遮蔽了尋找「我們的法律」的視線。因此，本文主張，必須透過歷史的關照，來瞭解父權宰制的在地形貌，並基於對此在地父權型態及其歷史性再製的批判，來想像「我們的法律」所可能提供的抵抗，創造在地性別平等的新義。

This article is a post-colonial feminist critique of legal modernization in Taiwan. It is an engagement with the questions of how Taiwanese law developed under the shadow of legal Orientalism, and how this development has shaped and reshaped gender relations. Through a post-colonial feminist investigation into the history of Taiwanese succession law, the author demonstrates that the reformulation of succession alone Western lines -- the separation of patrilineal succession and property inheritance, the individualization and gender-neutralization of succession – fails to combat gender inequality. Women do not enjoy equal rights of succession as the law mandates it, and patrilineal succession has survived dramatic social changes in Taiwan. The dichotomy of property inheritance as an issue of law, and worship succession as a problem of culture, are both legal constructions, which also creates an Orientalist trap that treats local culture as backward patriarchy and Western law as progressive equality, and hence obscures the local pursuit of gender equality. It is suggested that we should, first, debunk the legal construction of ancestor worship as an issue of culture and property inheritance that is a subject of law, and secondly, reconceptualize succession rights through a critical deliberation on the possibility of “our laws” that empowers women.