Recently, the dialogue between blogger Quan Xixi and Japanese feminist scholar Chizuko Ueno has caused heated discussions. During the conversation, Quan Xixi and the two Peking University roommates asked questions, which were considered by netizens to be "offensive" to contemporary independent women, such as "Is it because you have been hurt by a man if you are not married or infertile?" Many believe that Quan Xixi is using feminism to endorse her "feudal" married life.
As a pioneer of contemporary feminism, Chizuko Ueno has put forward influential ideas such as "feminism is the pursuit of a society in which the weak can be respected" and "housewives' housework is unpaid 'unpaid labor'". What exactly is feminism? How to understand that many contemporary women choose not to marry and have no children? Does getting married and having children equal not being independent?
The Paper invited Tang Ling, a doctor of Oxford University and a lecturer in sociology, to talk about feminism and the contemporary women's plight.
Click on the image to ask a question
Marriage in chains?
@一条猪kk:
Is marriage necessarily a shackle for women, and as a feminist, what attitude should you take towards marriage?
Tang Ling:
It doesn't have to be shackles, and it doesn't have to be happiness. I personally first "de-enchanted" marriage. De-enchantment means that we temporarily let go of its culturally given emotional meaning (e.g., people are happiest when they get married). Marriage itself is a system in which people who are not related by blood form socially sanctioned families. Many people do not marry because they do not necessarily approve of the system. Many women have also begun to reflect on whether they must assume the role of "wife", and if so, what kind of "wife" it is. If you don't like such a script, of course, you can not participate. Many married people are also constantly rewriting the meaning of marriage with their own actions.
@金钟罩的玫瑰: Marriage is the cooperation of two people, of course, there are constraints, constraints become pain is shackles, constraints become self-discipline is growth. Happiness is contrasted, most importantly compared with oneself. Happiness is when the two grow together and become stronger and stronger financially.
@雾挲: Traditional society gives wives too many responsibilities and obligations, from the beginning of childbirth, women fade out of social interaction, and alone bear the so-called child-rearing and housework responsibilities.
@mituomm: Whether it is a shackle depends on what the individual thinks, and it is okay not to get married.
@中原一剑客: People always live in society, and there are many factors that affect marriage, such as spiritual, emotional, physiological, traditional, economic, social, pension and so on. Don't be rash and don't be decisive!
@白色盖毯:
What do you think of this conversation? Isn't it "complete" not to get married?
Tang Ling:
I feel that Quan Hee Hee may not have asked this question "on purpose", but the question itself is certainly offensive. The privilege of the mainstream often lies with people who can rightfully offend other lifestyles. The question makes everyone uncomfortable because it assumes that "marriage and children" are a complete life, while other lifestyles are a kind of "mutilation". In the process of questioning, we see a kind of logic that insists on using other "incompleteness" to explain what we think is "incomplete".
However, feminism advocates a pluralistic society. Not entering into marriage and entering marriage are both choices for the heterosexual community. Not entering into marriage or being gay is not because the original family is crippled.
Why do we have to be so obsessed with separating between "normal" and "abnormal" lifestyles? Why should we assume that marriage must be happy, but not entering into marriage must be sad? Every lifestyle has moments of happiness and sadness.
We don't ask, "Why did you get married?" "Why are you happy in your marriage?" "Did you enter marriage because your original family was broken?" "Why do you like the opposite sex?" So why do we suddenly have to dig into the bottom when faced with non-mainstream life choices?
@澎湃网友fYFzay: It's funny that there are often "elders" who are unhappy in their own married life and even devastated, and ask you why they ask you why.
@澎湃网友eEVJNj: Women nowadays are under a lot of pressure, she does not want to get married and have children, that is personal freedom, but also caused by the current social situation.
@舟立: What is marriage for? Can trying to form a family with strangers bring harmony? Isn't it very convenient to divorce, what's so scary about getting married! Of course, the socio-demographic must keep growing, otherwise the country will not be a state! For this reason, marriage and childbearing are also a legal obligation.
How to understand "misogyny"
@一平不喜:
How do you understand Chizuko Ueno's statement that "most men in Japan have female dislike, and even women have female dislike"? Sometimes I think women are sympathetic to women, like the Internet always says "girls help girls", but sometimes I feel that the "misogyny" of some women is quite serious. Chinese society must also have this kind of stereotyped but not easily detected prejudice. So how can we get rid of this prejudice and ensure that we are not "misogynistic"?
Tang Ling:
Ueno-sensei has said on different occasions that if you ask yourself if you are also "misogynistic", the answer is yes. If men's "misogyny" is mainly reflected in the objectification of women (that is, reducing women only to the level of "beauty"), then women's misogyny is mainly reflected in female competition (that is, women fight each other, men are not only exempt, but also qualified to mediate and judge). I will start with the language of the gender binary here, and finally hope that everyone can feel the core of women's critique in the way that power operates, so we can replace "men" with "strong people with vested interests in the system", and women with "weak people who are oppressed in the system". Because we all live in a world that rationalizes the law of the jungle, oppression, and injustice, everyone in this world actually starts with patriarchal thinking.
In Ueno-sensei's words, everyone starts with fear of weakness. Because none of us have tried to live in a truly diverse, equal, and inclusive environment, all we can do is constantly reflect on ourselves and the people around us, and then try to make our choices. We can pull a spectrum between the strong and the weak, and pluralism and equality. The problem now is that friends who have gone to the more feminist side are "attacking" not the most extreme institutional interests on the spectrum, but partners who are close to themselves who have stepped out of the pace of reflection. The established path paved for us by patriarchy is already a kind of survival of the fittest props that fight each other, perhaps we can also reflect on what kind of "liberation" can be achieved through inclusion rather than game?
The development of feminism
@白粥同学:
What direction do you think feminism in our country will go in the future? There is a lot of debate within feminism, and often very radical views are seen externally. Feminism is stigmatized as a "boxer" and always feels that the road ahead of feminism is difficult.
Tang Ling:
Let's look at the word "teacher" from a feminist perspective. Personally, except for the students and colleagues in my system who call me "teacher" or "Dr. Tang", I am more accustomed to people calling me "Lyn" or "Xiao Tang". I am very happy that I can "preach and teach karma" for some people who are destined for. But I believe that in the equal and inclusive social relations advocated by feminism, there will not be a "prophet" to guide and educate the "obscurant" masses towards a certain fixed future. This is the biggest difference between feminist theory and some other critical schools that I can recognize at the moment. So in fact, "classmates" and "teachers", you and me, are all shaping the diverse present and future of Chinese feminism!
In addition, regarding "boxers", I feel that the stigmatization of "boxers" is destroying pluralistic spaces and dividing women's rights. Instead of accusing the "boxers" of being too "tough" and "fierce" in their attitude, I want to be grateful to everyone for letting the idea of women's rights be seen. In addition, I feel that the infighting of awakened feminists is somewhat like a kind of "female competition". At this time, I am more vigilant about who has the power to decide right and wrong? I cherish the space where opinions can be freely discussed. In the process of discussion, we defend and polish our position, isn't it participating in the construction of women's rights? We can disagree with each other's position, but we must absolutely hold on to this space that allows us to discuss.
@澎湃网友uuQJZ3:
Longing for a free and independent lifestyle, but trapped by social and family pressure, how to deal with this contradiction and find the most comfortable way to live?
Tang Ling:
Maybe we can not start with "we VS family, society"; Either freedom or oppression, the binary perspective begins to understand this problem. Our families and society are mutually influencing and constructing relationships. If there is a good communication environment in the family itself, and everyone is good at sharing their feelings, you can try to be honest with each other, not just "measure each other by the good looks in the textbook". Every communication is an opportunity to better understand each other and draw boundaries with each other. Although the process will be difficult, it is only after walking through this that I gain a deeper understanding. The profound meaning here is not only to know each other as a daughter or mother, but also to realize what kind of person the other party is and what kind of person he is.
Everyone can find their own "off-mainstream" spectral position. The meaning of embracing diversity is the realization that no practice is more "advanced" than another. And every time we find our own practice, we are paving the way for others in society.