Gender Issue in Chinese Nationalism as a Complex Relationship between Pervasive Socio-Cultural Practices and Politics – Term Paper Example
Gender issue in Chinese nationalism as presented by Yu Dafu is a complex relationship between pervasive socio-cultural practices and politics. In regards to this, he portrayed strong consideration towards radical transformations to achieve modernization and enhance gender equality in China. His presentations entail emotions for the creation and control of symbolic capital. Also, he highlights the consequences of informal practice such as the complex relationships formed between state and the citizens. In his articles he points out faults of which show women to possess less moral strength or political conviction when compared to the resurrected versions of idealized feminine sacrifice, such as loving mothers. In addition, he also highlights issues of female marginalization and provide alternative exemplifications of women in the twentieth-century China. Hence, the work highlight concerns about the relationship between political radicalism and cultural practices through analysis of gender issues and empowerment of women. An empowered Chinese woman is presented as a person of rebellious complexity notwithstanding, or precisely due to the apparent usefulness for the dissemination of radical dissertations of Chinese modernity
In his presentations, Yu Dafu championed the liberalization of Chinese women and gender equity in China. However, his work also exhibit double standard in his approaches. First, he made it clear that male intellectuals experienced great anxiety about their own masculinity and modernity. This is in relation to gender concerns and women empowerment in China. To justify the claim, some of the sections in his presentations raise gender stereotypes concerns. Furthermore, he also shows male doubts in gender development and equity. This are revealed through the establishment and maintenance of groupings like emotional versus rational, autobiographical versus social. Nonetheless, the presentations provide necessary attacks against masterful artistic practices and traditional morality. These further worsened the situation of women and promoted critic for female writers and intellectuals. Majority of men capitalized on these issues and suggested that women lack artistic control and social consciousness, hence, they should always be controlled by men.
Chinese men showed varied views about gender equality to further their agenda and remain relevant to the existing structure. It is necessary to note that male depiction of empowered women encompassed conflicting contradictions between the purported bad habits and progressive wrong information of traditional sensibility. Gender concern in particular, female empowerment was used mainly by leaders as tool for social mobilization and public instruction. The main fear of men was portrayed by a category of real life empowered women who demonstrated to be more inspiring than fictional prototypes. In view of the disobedient women in both real life and, broader discussion of the discourse on emotionality, ascertained necessary for the creation and promotion of female participation on the male dominated discourse on Chinese modernity. Hence, the politics of emotionality developed to be discursive interaction in Chinese nationalism and promotion of gender considerations.
Generally, the society and the leaders sought to promote male subordination. This facilitated the identification and development of male strategies in order to undermine gender equality. The main objectives involved maintaining the male struggle to ensure their independent identity and characters. Furthermore, the issue of gender inequality was promoted by the existing Chinese hierarchy. This comprised a gendered structure founded on the principle of a male a leader and female as disciple relationship. This in turn affected efficiency and nature of the male driven initiatives in regards to liberation of women and promotion of gender equality. Consequently, male intellectuals developed counter measures to promote men authority in their critical analysis and development plans.
Dennis and Rutledge M in their book about ‘Marginality, power and social structure issues in race, class, and gender analysis’ also strived to demonstrate modernity and gender in early twentieth-century China. Though, with the consciousness despite the widely circulated and utilized critical essays in the promotion of Chinese womens liberation, the term "new woman" was established on several problematic assumptions.
In conclusion, the paper highlights major issue of concern in gender promotion in China. The faults as presented by Yu Dafu and other intellectuals have been the major hindrances to gender empowerment. This explains reasons for female oppression in homes, work places and learning institutions in China. Therefore, it is important to revise and conceptualize the nature of relationship s between liberation of Chinese women and the interventions for modernization of Chinese culture. This also discussed by Tam, Kwok, and Terry Siu Yip in the literature about Gender and discourse. Besides, it is necessary to put up appropriate and efficient measures to evaluate the agency of Chinese women, exclusively female intellectuals and their efforts in the Chinese revolution and gender issues. These are concerns which are of immense academic interest internationally and also vital to the recent Chinese intellectual history. However, little emphasis is put into them. Thereby the concerns still challenge disciplinary and national and boundaries in the current postmodern, postcolonial and multicultural age. In order address the issues the work entails and analysis of the early twentieth-century Chinese fiction, specifically Yu Dafu.
Dennis, Rutledge M.. Marginality, power and social structure issues in race, class, and gender analysis. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2005. Print.
"Google Books." Google Books. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2014. .
Tam, Kwok, and Terry Siu Yip. Gender, discourse and the self in literature: issues in mainland China, Taiwan and Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 2010. Print.