The issue of gender equality

A village in Anhui province is trying to stoke a "naming revolution" by offering a reward of 1,000 yuan ($162) to a family that gives its newborn the surname of its mother. This well-intended policy, aimed at elevating rural women's social status, however, may not fulfill its purpose because it cannot change the social institutions that encourage male superiority, says an article in Southern Metropolis Daily. Excerpts:

Chinese people, especially rural residents, have traditionally preferred boys over girls because male offspring "carry forward the family name". For instance, in some parts of Guangdong province, a lantern is lighted in the ancestral hall if a boy is born in the family. A girl's birth, however, doesn't call for any such celebration.

The village in Anhui is trying to change such traditional beliefs and deep-rooted practices by offering couples cash rewards for giving a newborn its mother's family name. Its intention is noble; it wants to challenge the ill effects of patriarchal society, including people's preference for sons, and reverse the skewed sex ratio.

Men's superiority, generally speaking, has been institutionalized through three social practices: a child gets the father's family name, heritage and skills (and property) are passed down only to boys, and a woman has to live in her husband's home. These traditions are thousands of years old and have led to insufficient protection of women's rights in rural areas.

The battle for gender equality requires changes in many fields at all levels. It is hard to say whether merely changing the family name will change the perception of the people about male superiority. The change in the family name will not make much of a difference unless there is a corresponding change in social institutions and people's mindset. If women continue to be treated as second-class citizens in the job market and politics, the situation will not change by just giving children their mothers' family names.

The opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

(China Daily 08/07/2014 page9)