The controversy over China's feminist issues has been reignited, with this time focusing on the struggle for the right to bear a father's surname, rather than the previous incidents of female bullying, namely "Why should my child bear the father's surname instead of the mother's?" After the "awakening of female consciousness," more women have realized that men enjoy all the benefits in marriage, while women suffer reproductive injuries and time costs, yet still lose the right to bear a father's surname. Is it wrong for women to fight for the right to bear a father's surname? Of course not. China's laws have long stipulated that children can bear either the father's or the mother's surname. Therefore, the right to bear a father's surname is equal for both spouses, as long as they reach an agreement through discussion. However, with the development of society, men have taken control of the main productive forces, gradually changing the practice to favor the father's surname, a tradition inherited by the vast majority of countries worldwide for thousands of years. But surely, our ancestors could never have imagined that their descendants would end up divorcing over the issue of the right to bear a father's surname.
Online feminists have adopted an uncompromising stance, insisting that children born after their ten-month pregnancy must bear their surname, treating ancestral customs as a thorn in their side. Resolving the surname inheritance issue is not inherently difficult. If couples cannot reach an agreement on surname rights, they may explore alternative solutions to mutual satisfaction. For instance, they could opt to name their next child after the mother. Alternatively, they might establish pre-natal agreements specifying the surname for boys or girls, along with other similar arrangements.
Yet radical feminists turn a blind eye to this issue, resorting only to relentless criticism. It begs the question: Must all children bear their mother's surname to satisfy them? What's both infuriating and ironic is that even the concept of credibility has become a target of feminist critique. Ultimately, the right to bear a surname and credibility are merely triggers. Who bears the surname and why not the mother's? These details are irrelevant. What truly matters is how some women attempt to leverage the underlying gender oppression to fight for broader rights.
It is undeniable that in ancient China, women suffered various inhuman persecutions under feudal customs. The most criticized practice was foot binding, commonly known as "wrapping small feet." At the same time, customs such as "a woman without talent is virtuous," women being denied education and freedom to go out, and women being barred from serving guests at the table further consolidated male dominance in feudal society, creating a situation of male superiority and female inferiority. Oppressed women urgently yearned for liberation.
At the end of the Qing Dynasty and the beginning of the Republic of China, the term "women's rights" was first introduced from Japan to China, exerting a significant influence on the intellectual circles of the time. Later, through the translation and introduction by Ma Junwu and the vigorous advocacy by Jin Tianhe, "women's rights" gradually gained widespread acceptance in China's intellectual circles and became the ideological program for women's liberation. However, the old democratic revolution led by the bourgeoisie failed to achieve true liberation for women.
It was not until the establishment of the new China, under the slogan "Women can hold up half the sky" proposed by our great leaders, that laws on gender equality and the protection of women's rights were continuously improved, completely overturning the centuries-old subordinate status of women in the family.
As early as the 1950s, China's women's movement saw a surge in literacy campaigns, with educational institutions such as women's literacy classes and night schools becoming ubiquitous. To encourage women to enhance their social participation, the great leader also encouraged them: "Times have changed, but men and women are equal. What male comrades can achieve, female comrades can also accomplish." However, in recent years, Chinese online feminists have emerged. Whenever news of discrimination or oppression against women surfaces, they quickly escalate the scale under their influence. With the widespread use of media platforms, Chinese feminists have gradually become active across various platforms, evolving into different schools of thought, among which the most influential are the "Free Will School" and the "Radicalism School." The Free Will School is closer to the feminist movement in its general sense, emphasizing the realization of gender equality in society.
The so-called 'female chauvinists' belong to a radicalist school of thought. Their stance, which posits that 'women's and men's interests are antagonistic' —that is, men are the enemies of women—has been highly controversial.
The enemy of feminism is patriarchy, but it does not mean that the enemy of women is men. When radicalism takes such a position, it is doomed to fail in realizing the equality of men and women in the true sense.
Throughout history, countless outstanding men have made tremendous contributions to women's liberation and gender equality, yet radical feminists turn a deaf ear to these efforts, persistently inciting gender opposition and hostility online.
If feminists choose to make good use of this force, it will greatly promote the further development of the women's equality movement in China. However, in reality, some extreme statements have instead drawn more opposition.
With the progress of the times, Chinese women have begun to participate in various fields such as economy, politics, and culture, and their social status is also continuously improving. Even in some fields, women still face unfair treatment, but the vast majority of women can live in the way they like and strive for their own careers.
In the adult world, there are no easy words. In the face of reality, both men and women are the ones being 'exploited.' It is believed that the majority support gender equality, encourage women around them to pursue their due rights, and provide the necessary assistance. It is also acknowledged that those holding extreme positions always constitute a small minority.
Perhaps differing perspectives and life experiences make it hard for men and women to have rational conversations or truly empathize. Why not try giving each other a little more time and trust?
However, we firmly oppose the radical feminists 'abuse of feminism, which has reduced reproductive freedom to a complete opposition to marriage and childbearing; made gender equality a pursuit of irresponsible privileges; and turned women's advocacy into an intensification of gender conflicts.
