Nationalist and Anti-Nationalist Feminist Discourses in Late Imperial China*

Abstract:With the spread of Western ideals that valorize gender equality and the popularization of women’s education in late imperial China,feminism advanced with unprecedented impact.Qiu Jin 秋瑾 (1877—1907),who espoused nationalism,became the most famous feminist in that era.Previous scholarship has popularly understood early Chinese feminism as nationalistic and acknowledged the subordination of women’s liberation movements to the project of national emancipation.This well-known assertion does not take into consideration the anarcho-feminism championed by He Zhen 何震 (1886—1920?).The nationalist feminist discourse advocated by Qiu Jin and the emerging anarcho-feminist discourse endorsed by He Zhen reveal essential truths about the relationship between woman,state,and the larger world.A comparative study of Qiu Jin and He Zhen’s feminist thought illuminates the internal conflicts and insights inside early Chinese feminism and is explicative of the ensuing evolution of Chinese feminist thought.This study aims to present the panoramic and pluralistic landscape of early Chinese feminism in late imperial China.

Keywords:anarchism;Chinese feminism;nationalism;He Zhen;Qiu Jin

The decline of the old sociopolitical ideology embedded in Confucian codes and the emergence of a new ideology inspired by Western ideals make the transitional period from the late Qing era to the Republic particularly appealing for the study of political and social ideas—as progressive circles promote gender equality and women’s right to education while facing resistance from conservative forces.Liang Qichao 梁启超 (1873—1929),a famous reformist and thinker,attributed the national decline to the backwardness of women’s education in China.Apart from male participation in women’s liberation,several educated women were also actively engaged in the campaign for gender equality,the most famous being Qiu Jin.1郭延礼：《秋瑾年谱》，济南：齐鲁书社，1983年，第5—10页。[GUO Yanli,Qiu Jin nianpu (A Chronicle of Qiu Jin),Jinan:Qilu Publishing House,1983,5—10.]As a highly publicized female revolutionary and martyr,she has always been popular:theatrical pieces have been written,and films have been made in commemoration of her;numerous scholarly studies have been done on her;monuments were constructed,and public memorials were organized in her name.Qiu Jin’s feminist ideas are widely held to be nationalist,and she is prized as the pioneering feminist in late imperial China.

Previous scholarship has popularly understood Chinese feminism as nationalistic and acknowledged the subordination of women’s liberation movements to the project of national emancipation.This well-known assertion,though arguably applicable to Qiu Jin among others,does not take into consideration the anarcho-feminism championed by He Zhen and other anarchists before the Chinese Revolution of 1911.The simplistic and over-generalizing understanding of early Chinese feminism as nationalist obscures the opposing anti-statist discourse of He Zhen and dramatically undermines the heterogeneity of first-wave Chinese feminism.

The astonishing similarity of life trajectory yet sharp contrast of viewpoints make the two feminists an excellent case for a comparative inquiry.Both studied in Japan,launched women’s association,inaugurated political journals,advocated girls’ education,and were involved in revolutionary activities.Existing historical materials are indicative of their possible acquaintance.He Zhen gathered Qiu Jin’s manuscripts after her execution by the Qing government on July 15,1907 and published the first collection of essays and poems by Qiu Jin.2Qiu Jin Shici was published in 1907.It has collected eighty-seven poems and thirty-eight ci of Qiu Jin.It is also called the “Zhifu version,” because He Zhen’s friend Wang Zhifu 王芷馥funded its publication.Xia Xiaohong holds that He Zhen prepared and set up the publication.夏晓虹：《秋瑾诗词集初期流传经过考述》,《中华文化研究》2014年夏季，第39—50页。[XIA Xiaohong,“Qiu Jin shici ji chuqi liuchuan jingguo kaoshu” (A Study of the Early Transmission of Qiu Jin’s Poems and Ci),Zhonghua wenhua yanjiu (Chinese Culture Research)(Spring2014):39—50.]At the same time,although both identified as radical feminists,the theoretical frameworks by which each established the premises of political outlook on various aspects of women’s lives frequently run counter to one another.

The nationalist feminist discourse advocated by Qiu Jin and the emerging anarcho-feminist discourse endorsed by He Zhen reveal essential truths about the relationship between woman,state,and the larger world.A comparative study of Qiu Jin and He Zhen’s feminist thought reveals the internal conflicts and insights inside early Chinese feminism and is explicative of the ensuing evolution of Chinese feminist thought.However,never have the two feminists been put together for a detailed and systematic comparative analysis.3Xia Xiaohong has studied Qiu Jin,Yan Bing,and He Zhen together in 夏晓虹：《晚清女报中的国族论述与女性意识——1907年的多元呈现》，《北京大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2014年第51卷第4期，第118—132页。[XIA Xiaohong,“Wan Qing nübao zhong de guozu lunshu yu nvxing yishi—1907 nian de duoyuan chengxian” (Nationalist and Racialist Theory and Female Consciousness in the Journals of Late Qing—Plural Representations of 1907),Beijing daxue xuebao (Journal of Peking University [Philosophy and Social Sciences]51,no.4 (2014):118—132.]However,the study is not detailed enough to show the mounting tension between different ideological discourses.This study addresses this gap in the intention to present the panoramic and pluralistic landscape of early Chinese feminism in late imperial China.It details the difference between the two feminist discourses surrounding their conception of the state,women’s education and labor,marriage,and gender equality,and investigates the reasons for the radical divergence of the two feminists.

The Conception of the State or Anti-State

It is my argument that the fundamental difference leading to disparate political assertions derives from Qiu Jin’s insistence on women as national mothers in a Han-centered modern state and He Zhen’s claim of women as individuals in an anarcho-communist society.The first radical difference lies in their conceptualizations of the state.Qiu Jin closely links women’s liberation to the establishment of a Han-centered state;however,He Zhen firmly believes women’s liberation lies in the annihilation of state and government.This fundamental difference of views anticipates their difference on various topics and corresponding strategies to women’s problems.Xia Xiaohong 夏晓虹distinguishes Qiu Jin’s feminism as ethnocentric in her 2014 study.However,this distinction is suspicious because Qiu Jin’s ethnocentric focus on Han Chinese is still anchored in the nationalist discourse.A distinction which acknowledges both the racialist focus and nationalistic emphasis is necessary to understand Qiu Jin’s feminism.In the theoretical framework of Qiu Jin,women’s liberation,the anti-Manchu movement,and national rejuvenation are intimately interwoven.In her famous speech addressing Chinese women,she declares that if Chinese women do not pull themselves together,when the nation comes to an end,it would be too late.4（清）秋瑾：《敬告中国二万万女同胞》，见夏晓虹主编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第85页。[QIU Jin,“Jingao Zhongguo er wan wan nütongbao” (A Respectful Proposal to the Twenty Million Chinese Women),in Jin Tianhe,LüBicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan (Volume of Jin Tianhe,LüBicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen),ed.XIA Xiaohong,Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,85.]InJingwei shi《精卫石》(Stone of Jingwei),a twenty-episodetanci弹词 (a narrative folk song form in China that alternates between verse and prose),Qiu Jin envisions the possibility of national emancipation and restoration of a Han-state accomplished by the community of male and female revolutionaries.At the beginning of thetanci,she deplores the social ills and evils of the Manchu state:“The other race is now in charge of the nation.People of our race are tortured,a higher tax is imposed to guarantee the privileges of other races.”5Ibid.,105.In the same paragraph,she parallels Manchu’s evils with the sexual inequality which has long plagued Chinese society:“the evilest social custom is the over-appreciation of men and depreciation of women.”6Ibid.,106.The simultaneous overthrow of the Manchu government and abolition of sexual inequality are vital to strengthening the state for Qiu Jin.

Qiu Jin’s nationalist-racialist feminism is characteristic of the larger historical setting of national salvation engaging the constitutional reformists.In many ways,Qiu Jin’s nationalist feminism operates in line with the principles proposed by Liang Qichao.Both consider the weakness of women’s education as the primary reason for national decline.In the article “Dahun Pian”《大魂篇》(On Great Soul) published inZhongguo Nübao《中国女报》(China Women’s News),Qiu Jin argues that “three followings and four virtues” are teachings for slaves;footbinding is an excruciating punishment intended to destroy slaves;and that the teaching of “a woman without talent is virtuous” is a rigid principle used to discipline slaves.7Ibid.,101.Meanwhile,both Qiu Jin and Liang Qichao stress the role of women as mothers of new citizens.Also,in“Dahun pian,” she contends that,“women are the pioneers of citizens who cultivate qualified citizens by way of family education.”8Ibid.,100.The Chinese historian of education,Shu Xincheng 舒 新城 (1893—1960),remarks that the discourse ofxin xianqi liangmu新贤妻良母 (new good wife and wise mother) is a common stance taken by male revolutionaries in the political reformation movement.9舒新城：《近代中国教育思想史》，北京：商务印书馆，2014年，第491页。[SHU Xincheng,Jindai Zhongguo jiaoyu sixiang shi (A History of Contemporary Educational Thought in China),Beijing:The Commercial Press,2014,491.]Although this discourse is progressive for its acknowledgement of women’s agency in the national project and for its attentiveness to women’s rights to education,it is highly restrictive and patriarchal due to its overarching emphasis on women’s domesticity.Nevertheless,this idea attracts a large number of female followers,among whom is the reputed Qiu Jin.To a certain extent,she identifies with the patriarchal understanding of women,which bespeaks the complex and ambivalent nature of her feminist thought.However,it should also be understood that the marriage between subversive ideas of sexual equality and conservative models of the feminine often attests to the tortuous trajectory that feminists took in order to publicize their ideas in the early stages of the revolution.For the emerging group of female intellectuals who still lack sufficient resources to promote the feminist cause,this identification with the masculine is both a strategy and a compromise.

In no way does He Zhen’s political ideal resemble Qiu Jin’s and Liang Qichao’s conception of the state or agree with Qiu Jin’s racial revolution.She shows no belief in the nation-state,regardless of whether it is governed by the Han Chinese or Manchu court.She criticizes that “the level of self-awareness among the women of China is shallow,and those who have attained a notch slightly higher rush to pick up the crumbs of men’s fallacious discourse of racial revolution.There is no doubt that the Manchu court should be overthrown,but I would like to point out that a Han sovereign or regime could be a disaster worse than the ones wrought by foreign rule.”10HE Zhen,“On the Revenge of Women,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,eds.Lydia H.Liu et al.(New York:Columbia University Press,2013),106.It is inferable that He Zhen is explicitly critical of Qiu Jin’s support of the racial revolution,the success of which means the restoration of the Han race,and the degeneration of the Manchu race and therefore guarantees no achievement of ultimate equality.Racial revolution does not eradicate oppression but reproduces the relations of oppressor and oppressed.

Further,He Zhen opposes the nation-state,because she construes it as both an instrument to oppress the lower classes within the state and an apparatus to colonize the weaker countries beyond the state.Bluntly put,nations are oppressive apparatuses which reinforce the unjust dichotomy between the powerful and the powerless,the rich and the poor,the strong and the weak.This oppression among nations,classes,and races goes hand in hand with male domination and female subordination.The working logic and mechanism behind these varieties of oppression are identical,and therefore a gender revolution must take place concurrently with the abolition of the state and an economic revolution governed by communism.He Zhen envisions a world characteristic of an anarchistic fantasy that is shared communally by all,regardless of gender,race,and nationality.The boundaries of the state must be erased to achieve absolute equality.Also,Liu Renpeng 刘人鹏 emphasizes that He Zhen’s feminism should be studied through the prism of anarcho-communism.11刘人鹏：《何震“女子解放”与〈天义〉的无政府共产主义视野》，见杨联芬主编：《性别与中国文化现代转型》，北京：东方出版社，2017年，第37页。[LIU Renpeng,“He Zhen ‘nüzi jiefang’ yu Tianyi de wuzhengfu gongchan zhuyi shiye” (He Zhen’s “Women’s Liberation” and Tianyi’s Anarcho-Communist Perspective),in Xingbie yu Zhongguo wenhua xiandai zhuanxing (Gender and Transformation of the Culture in 20th-Century China),ed.YANG Lianfen,Beijing:Oriental Publishing House,2017,37.]It is indeed true that communism is essential to equal distribution of property.For He Zhen,communism constitutes the economic ground of ultimate equality:if no one owns any more than anyone else,then there will no longer be division of classes.Furthermore,if everyone owns equally,then no woman will be coerced into prostitution or forced labor in order to make a living.Therefore,communism,anarchism,and feminism are three critical constituencies in her fantastic vision of an egalitarian world.Unlike the contemporaneous Chinese anarchists in Paris influenced profoundly by French individualist anarchists,He Zhen’s anarchist scheme valorizes equality more than freedom.At the root of her political vision lies a utopia in which everyone is equal in all domains.She has not proposed a concrete gradualist plan to realize her scheme other than a highly generalized and abstract formulation;the anarcho-communist-feminist vision acquires a utopian and fantastic quality.This leads one to suspect that her vision simply wipes out sexual differences to give way to a monotonous sameness.

In an era dominated by nationalist discourse,He Zhen’s anarchistic theory appears particularly unique,and scholars have traced the origins of He Zhen’s anarcho-feminism to mainly foreign influences and some native influences.It is observed that two turning points in her life define He Zhen’s acceptance of anarcho-feminism.The first is her entry intoAiguo Nüxue爱国女学 (Patriotic Women’s School) in July of 1904.In the winter of 1901,this school was founded by Cai Yuanpei 蔡元培 (1868—1940),an influential male intellectual and educator.Cai Yuanpei conceived“the rejection ofxianqi liangmu贤妻良母 discourse in favor of cultivation of women who endorse nihilism” as the motive of the school.12蔡元培：《蔡元培教育论集》，北京：中华书局，1984年，第326页。[CAI Yuanpei,Cai Yuanpei jiaoyu lunji (A Collection of Cai Yuanpei’s Essays on Education),Beijing:Zhonghua Book Company,1984,326.]It can be argued that He Zhen’s first reception of anarchism and nihilism starts at theAiguo Nüxue.Her time spent studying in Japan marks the second leap to acceptance of anarchism.He Zhen and her husband Liu Shipei 刘师培 (1884—1919),a classical scholar,went to Japan together in February of 1907.They came into close contact with the radical persuasion of Japanese socialists,and they were soon to accept anarchism.13夏晓虹：《晚清女报中的国族论述与女性意识——1907年的多元呈现》，第128页。[XIA Xiaohong,“Wan Qing nübao zhong de guozu lunshu yu nvxing yishi—1907 nian de duoyuan chengxian”(Nationalist and Racist Theory and Female Consciousness in the Journals of Late Qing—Plural Representations of 1907),128.]

Although He Zhen’s anti-statist discourse may have sounded shocking in her era,it nevertheless resembles in no small measure the political thought that Kang Youwei 康有为(1858—1927)exemplified inDatong Shu《大同书》(One-World Philosophy).Even though He Zhen and Kang Youwei barely share any common political stance,the former being an anarchist and the latter being a constitutional reformist,strong affinities are present in their significant societal conceptualizations.InDatong Shu,Kang ardently promotes the abolition of national boundaries as a way to achieve absolute equality.He cites the violence and cruelty of war as the worst evil caused by the existence of nations:“Countries co-exist simultaneously;strong countries merge with weak ones;big nations rival with the small ones;wars go on incessantly,and civilians die in masses.”14（清）康有为著，汤志均主编：《大同书》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2019年，第58页。[KANG Youwei,Datong Shu (One-World Philosophy),ed.TANG Zhijun,Shanghai:Shanghai Classics Publishing House,2019,58.]He imagines a world without boundaries and differences for everyone,regardless of sex,gender,titles,or nationality,in which there would be no chaos.15He foresees the difficulty of creating such a “One World,” therefore,he claims that even though the “One World”is possible,it must be achieved by small steps and through various stages.“It should begin with an association of nations of equal strength;then merge with societies of the same continent,religion,and race;eventually,the earth will be united through the alliance of equal people in the whole world.” See 萧公权：《中国政治思想史》，北京：商务印书馆，2011年，第681页。[XIAO Gongquan,Zhongguo zhengzhi sixiang shi (A History of Chinese Political Thought),Beijing:The Commercial Press,2011,681.]Both Kang Youwei’s One-World philosophy and He Zhen’s anarcho-communist vision are characteristic of a fantastic utopia.

On Women’s Education

The asymmetry of moral cultivation and intellectual education for women features heavily in the history of Chinese women’s education.The long history of women’s education can be best summarized in the canonical expressionnüzi wu cai bian shi de女子无才便是德 (a woman without talent is virtuous).The transformation of Chinese women’s education took place in tumultuous times of internal political fighting and external wars of late Qing.Caught in cultural crisis,intellectuals looked to the West for ways of national salvation:for example,the girls’ school established by missionaries in China,and Japan’s prosperity based on the development of national education.16舒新城：《近代中国教育思想史》，第490页。[SHU Xincheng,Jindai Zhongguo jiaoyu sixiang shi (A History of Contemporary Educational Thought in China),490.]Male intellectuals saw the unpopularity of women’s education as the root of national weakness and began to advocate for it—most importantly Kang Youwei,Liang Qichao,and Jin Tianhe 金天翮 (1873—1947).Liang Qichao writes:“Children’s education begins with the mother’s teaching,which is itself rooted in women’s education.Therefore,women’s education determines fundamentally whether a nation will survive or be destroyed and whether it will prosper or languish in weakness.”17LIANG Qichao,“On Women’s Education,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,194.Women have an impact on the fate of the nation and participate in public affairs indirectly by way of educating their sons to be better citizens.In the inaugural address ofNüzi Shijie《女子世界》(Women’s World),Jin Tianhe hails women as the “mothers of citizens.”Jin Tianhe and Liang Qichao contributed significantly to the sweeping discourse ofxin xianqi liangmu(new wise mothers and good wives) in the late Qing era.

Reservations and resistance about women’s education abounded,which is not surprising during a transitional period when new ideas are not yet influential.A radical proposal for women’s education would meet with heightened resistance,and even a moderately subversive educational reform would encounter difficulty.Thexin xianqi liangmudiscourse is,therefore,on the one hand,a conscious ideological creation for contemporary thinkers and reformers and,on the other,a compromise for female feminists—it is a limitation of the times.It marks Chinese women’s transition from traditional women,to a temporary stage as national mothers,and finally to their role as new women.Still,it challenged the old teachings to some extent,such asfu wei qi gang夫为妻纲 (husband guides wife).18张丽萍：《报刊与文化身份——1898—1918 中国妇女报刊研究》，北京：中国书籍出版社，2015年，第81页。[ZHANG Liping,Baokan yu wenhua shenfen—1898—1918 Zhongguo funübaokan yanjiu (Journals and Cultural Identity:A Study of Women’s Journals,1898—1918),Beijing:China Book Press,2015,81.]Among the female supporters of this discourse is the enthusiastic revolutionary Qiu Jin.

Qiu Jin’s educational thought could be regarded as a conflicting amalgamation of educating for national motherhood,and women’s self-sufficiency.On the one hand,Qiu Jin defends women’s educational right because she contends women are mothers of new citizens following the argument of Liang Qichao;on the other,she underscores the benefit of being self-sufficient.In a notice addressing the opening of a girls’ technical school,she writes:

For each one of the overseas Chinese female students,your opening of this girls’ short-term normal school is right for Chinese women and the country in the future...After the graduation exam,the students can engage with education.They can be instructors and nannies.They can glorify the flower of the country’s civilization and become the sacred national mothers.The reform of family education,the revolution of the social spirit,the cause of indefinite virtue,and the indefinite beatitude are all indebted to your few women of today.19（清）秋瑾：《实践女学校附属清国女子师范工艺速成科略章》，见夏晓虹主编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第91页。[QIU Jin,“Shijian nüxuexiao fushu Qingguo nüzi shifan gongyi sucheng luezhang” (Concise Principles of Qingguo Short-term Women’s Normal School Affiliated to Practical Women’s School),in Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan (Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen),ed.XIA Xiaohong,Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,91.]Compared with women’s education before the 1898 Reform,which revolved around women’s moral cultivation,Qiu Jin’s ideological progress is marked:women should walk out of the inner chambers and enter the public realm.Disrupting the spatial division between the sexes,girls’schools become the intermediate space in transition between the spheres of domestic duties and of public service.However,the limitations of this thought are just as pronounced.Qiu Jin also finds women’s value primarily in maternal nurturance,a trait still closely associated with reproductive function.Women are national mothers and are therefore key to family reform.Her educational thought is conditioned by the time and is inevitably reflective of the progress and resignations of a transitional period.

He Zhen,however,is uncompromising in her insistence on women’s natural rights as human beings and the dissociation of women from reproductive function.She openly castigates educational propositions shared by Qiu Jin and Liang Qichao.It is worth citing He Zhen’s insight in full:

The most abhorrent opinion is nothing other than the golden principle in the intellectual circles,namely,“family education is the foundation of all education.If we want to enhance family education,we must start with women’s education.” If I probe the connotation deeper,it implies that the whole purpose of educating women is child-rearing.Furthermore,this still is for the sake of male children,not for female children.I think that children should be raised publicly,and they are not private property for families;the education of children belongs to society,not the women.The purpose of educating women is to liberate women.It is never about restraining women to the family after graduation so that they can assume the responsibilities for men.The principles and goals of the girls’ schools are all mistaken.Why would we blame the government for the barbarian regulations? Today,I contradict the famous principle and state reversely,“family revolution is the foundation of all revolution.” If we want to propel the family revolution,we must begin from women’s education.20（清）何震：《论女子的教育问题》，见万仕国、刘禾主编：《天义·衡报》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2016年，第197页。[HE Zhen,“Lun nüzi de jiaoyu wenti” (Issues on Women’s Education),in Tianyi Heng Bao (NaturalJustice and Equity),eds.WAN Shiguo and Lydia H.Liu,Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2016,197.]

The difference between family revolution and family education is thus that the former subverts the old gender division and restores gender equality,while the latter escalates gender division and inequality.In the middle of widespread publication of women as national mothers,He Zhen stands as a completely different voice in the 1900s.

A different understanding of women leads to different educational visions.There are four guiding principles that Qiu Jin proposes here:the abolition of foot-binding,popularization of girls’literacy,learning pragmatic skills,and prioritizing patriotic education.In “Jingao Zhongguo er wan wan nütongbao”《敬告中国二万万女同胞》(A Respectful Proposal to the Twenty Million Chinese Women),she remarks:“If a middle-aged woman gives birth to a son,then he should be sent to the school.It is the same for the daughter.Do not bind her foot.It is good to send young girls to school,but if not,girls should learn to read and write at home.”21（清）秋瑾：《敬告中国二万万女同胞》，见《天义·衡报》，第85页。[QIU Jin,“Jingao Zhongguo er wan wan nütongbao” (A Respectful Proposal to the Twenty Million Chinese Women),in Tianyi Heng Bao (Natural Justice and Equity),85.]Anti-foot-binding is one of the top priorities for the national project of revival.In the “Fu nüxuetang shiban luezhang”《附女学堂试办略章》(Concise Principles for the Trial Opening of Girls’ Schools),Liang Qichao made it clear that foot-binding is a corrupt custom,and after practicing anti-foot-binding for a while,girls’schools should not recruit students with bound feet.22（清）梁启超：《附女学堂试办略章》，见舒新城主编：《近代中国教育史料》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2016年，第282页。[LIANG Qichao,“Fu nüxuetang shiban luezhang” (Concise Principles for the Trial Opening of Girls’Schools),in Jindai Zhongguo jiaoyu shiliao (Historical Materials of Education in Contemporary China),ed.SHU Xincheng,Beijing:People’s University of China Press,2016,282.]The freeing of the body is tantamount to the liberation of the mind and women.Women were positioned as symbols of China’s lack of power,authority,and prestige as a modern nation-state.23Wendy Larson,Women and Writing in Modern China (Palo Alto:Stanford University Press,1998),26.In “Nüjie Zhong”《女界钟》(The Women’s Bell),Jin Tianhe commented,“in our world,there is not a single man who does not enjoy the triumph of lording women like a tyrant.If women are not treated as mere playthings,then they are seen as colonial possessions.”24JIN Tianhe,“The Women’s Bell,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,209.Associating women with colonial possessions,he established the parallel between women’s bodies and the colonized state of China.Women’s bodies become a critical site charged with the tension between the benightedness of past and the possibilities of future.A free woman signals the making of a free China,shedding its feudal weakness and backwardness.

Although Qiu Jin suggests that women should learn pragmatic subjects in order to be able in order to live independently,she does not explain the ways to resolve the irreconcilability of domestic obligations and public duties.This uneasy marriage of two conflicting duties finds many influential thinkers amongst its enthusiastic proponents,including the famous poet,Lü Bicheng 吕碧城 (1883—1943).Echoing Qiu Jin’s opinions,she states,“Citizens are the foundation of a country;women are the pillar of the family.As a general rule,men marry women to establish a household,and the country builds on the accumulation of households.Therefore,in order to solidify the base,it is advised that individual rights of independence should be edified.”25（清）吕碧城：《论提倡女学之总则》，见夏晓虹主编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第51页。[LÜ Bicheng,“Lun tichang nüxue zhi zongze” (On the Principles of Advocating Women’s Education),in Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan (Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen),ed.XIA Xiaohong,Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,51.]Such ideas reflect the conflicts innate in the propagandizing and implementing of women’s education in the late Qing era.“Confucian thought still focused on the building of female moral character;nonetheless,nationalistic thinking promoted pragmatic training in the sciences,literacy,and physical education.”26CHENG Weikun,“Going Public through Education:Female Reformers and Girl’s Schools in Late Qing Beijing,”Late Imperial China 21,no.1 (2000):124.

The fusion and tension of morality and talent pervade educational pedagogy and curriculum.In the “Nüzi xiaoxuetang zhangcheng”《女子小学堂章程》(Principles for Girls’ Primary Schools),the Qing government mandates that in girls’ primary schools,five subjects are obligatory:selfcultivation,Chinese classics,math,needlework,and gymnastics.27舒新城：《近代中国教育史料》，第287页。[SHU Xincheng,Jindai Zhongguo jiaoyu shiliao (Historical Materials of Education in Contemporary China),287.]The learning of needlework mirrors domestic needs,and the instruction of Chinese classics (better understood in terms of Confucian classics) demonstrates the importance of the cultivation of female morality and virtue.In a similar vein,“Xuebu zouding nüzi shifan zhangcheng”《学部奏定女子师范章程》(Official Regulations of Women’s Normal School by Department of Education) demands that female students in normal schools should diligently cultivate the virtues of quietness,submissiveness,kindness,and demureness.28Ibid.,286.It is safe to state that while the Qing government recognizes the urgency of learning pragmatic subjects for women,it also excessively emphasized Confucian ideals of femininity in pedagogical design.In one sense,the importance of moral cultivation outstrips that of intellectual cultivation.Nationalist consciousness has to cede to the deep-seated Confucian moral codes.

Different from the moral cultivation highlighted by the Qing government,Qiu Jin underlines patriotic education,or in other terms,nationalist education.It is noteworthy that the inclusion of patriotic education is in line with her emphasis on practical learning as a way to strengthen the nation.However,the scholarship of Qiu Jin has neglected this central element in discussions of her educational thought.The rise of patriotism and nationalism starts at the end of the nineteenth century.In the year of 1895,the defeat of the Chinese navy in the Sino-Japanese War wounded national pride gravely,but also provided an opportunity for an upsurge of patriotism.In “Jinggao wo tongbao”《警告我同胞》(A Warning to My Compatriots),Qiu Jin expressed jealousy towards Japanese citizens’ profound respect for soldiers in the army.She argues that the Japanese people’s esteem for their soldiers inspires them to fight fearlessly in the war.This level of respect was absent in China.29（清）秋瑾：《警告我同胞》，见夏晓虹主编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第87页。[QIU Jin,“Jingao wo tongbao” (A Warning to My Compatriots),in Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan (Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen),ed.XIA Xiaohong,Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,87.]In the article,she calls for a shift of attitude in favor of soldiers.Patriotic education should permeate all ranks and walks of life and would revolutionize the Chinese mind by creating a unified collective identity.

In addition to other educational initiatives,Qiu Jin advocated for more Chinese women to study abroad.She complains that the number of Chinese women studying in Japan is minimal and few women are aware of the benefits of overseas learning.30（清）秋瑾：《实践女学校附属清国女子师范工艺速成科略章》，见夏晓虹主编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，第91页。[QIU Jin,“Shijian nüxuexiao fushu Qingguo nüzi shifan gongyi suchengke luezhang” (Concise Principles of Qingguo Short-term Women’s Normal School Affiliated to Practical Women’s School),in Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan (Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen),91.]In the year of 1904,in an escalating breakdown of family relations,Qiu Jin broke her ties with her husband Wang Zifang 王子芳(b.1881) and resolved to go to Japan.The primary concerns of her stay in Japan were analyzing Japanese women’s education,accumulating wisdom for Chinese women’s education,and obtaining credentials to open a girls’ school.31夏晓虹：《晚清文人妇女观》，北京：北京大学出版社，2016年，第269页。[XIA Xiaohong,Wan Qing wenren funüguan (Intellectuals’ Opinions on Women in the Late Qing),Beijing:Beijing University Press,2016,269.]Considering the strict seclusion of Chinese women in history,studying abroad is,without any exaggeration,a radical move away from Confucian teachings of femininity.The contradiction becomes even more dramatic because overseas studies interfere with women’s commitments to natal and marital families substantially,as was the case for Qiu Jin.

He Zhen and Qiu Jin’s educational visions share little common ground.He Zhen published “Nüzi jiaoyu wenti”《女子教育问题》(Issues on Women’s Education) inTianyi Bao《天义报》(Journal of Natural Justice) in December of 1907,in which she refuted Western and Japanese women’s educational paradigms,the current curriculum laid out by governments and intellectuals,and the prevailing belief that women’s education was to serve as the foundation of family education.Since the late Qing period,the appreciation and dissemination of Western attitudes and Western-influenced Japanese thoughts have been the norm in Chinese intellectual circles.Both female and male intellectuals looked upon European ideological models such as equality,liberty,and science in an introspective effort to examine the restrictive and debilitating impacts of Confucian morality.For example,Jin Tianhe asserted that:

Western women’s education is fantastic! The depth of its science is unfathomable,the level of its thoughts is so advanced,the human character is so noble and respectable...In the case of the Netherlands,a lagging country in Europe,no girl at the age of six is not schooled,no girl at the age of sixteen is not graduated from high school.In its society,if a girl is not conversant in English,French,and German,she is dismissed as an “uneducated citizen.”32JIN Tianhe,“The Women’s Bell,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,21.

Indiscriminate admiration for Western models on all aspects of society was endemic in Chinese intellectuals caught in the historical crisis in which the founding sociopolitical principles foundered.

In contrast,He Zhen stands out as one of the few thinkers who refused to endorse either Western ways or Chinese feudal values,stating for example that “the women’s education in recent days is the education of slavery not only in East Asia but also in Europe.”33（清）何震：《论女子的教育问题》，见《天义·衡报》，第193页。[HE Zhen,“Lun nüzi de jiaoyu wenti” (Issues on Women’s Education),in Tianyi Heng Bao (Natural Justice and Equity),193.]He Zhen contends that religious teaching,which proclaims women as the origin of all evils and perpetuates female submission and male domination,is foundational to Western women’s education.She also unabashedly repudiates the “ethical” focus that upholds women’s education in Japan.Contesting the educational goal ofxianqi liangmuthe indoctrination of loyalty to Emperor and love for the country in the Japanese model,He Zhen deplored the mediated agency of women in the project of nationbuilding and advocated direct political participation in the construction of an anarchistic society.

Her condemnation of the curriculum also marks her divergence from Qiu Jin’s educational outlook.Qiu Jin’s emphasis on women’s potential to make livelihoods through childcare is deeply informed by the Confucian dictates of female morality and popular (classical) understanding of female attributes.He Zhen distances herself from the concrete design of learning anchored in domestic management,taking on the relegation of women to the domestic realm and the gendered division of labor.The preservation ofJiazheng家政 (domestic management) as a subject in girls’schools reinforces the asymmetrical arrangements in the Chinese feudal gender-family system.Jiazhengas a subject must be banished to liberate women truly.Both religious teaching andJiazhengstand in the way of cultivating free human beings.

He Zhen’s suspicion of school subjects that teach practical skills to make a living—such as needlework,cooking,weaving,and so on—largely contradict the propositions of Qiu Jin.He Zhen advises that they should not be abolished for the sake of women’s financial empowerment;however,they do not guarantee women’s ultimate independence.She asserts that the mobility allowing women to transition from the private sphere to the public sphere does not free women from the grip of capitalists.Regarding women’s labor,she does not approve the Western way,either,claiming that “in the various Euro-American countries,one can find no more cruel and strict regulations on women’s work than those of the factory.”34HE Zhen,“On the Question of Women’s Labor,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,79.Women’s self-sufficiency can find expression only in a society free from social stratifications and divisions and can only be made possible through economic revolution annulling the monetary system.“If there were the implementation of a system of communalized property,then everyone,whether man or woman,would labor equally...When employed labor is transformed into equal labor,then some people would no longer be dependent on other people;everyone would be independent.”35Ibid.,91.To conclude,the subjects which teach women to earn their livelihoods are a necessity for women,but to eradicate unequal labor and uneven distribution of property,one must work in a unified effort toward communism.

He Zhen’s unique contribution to feminism lies in her acknowledgment of male oppression in capitalist society.She argues that in the current economic system,men are not free from oppression,nor are they independent individuals due to the uneven distribution of property.Since men toil for a corrupt system in which their bodies and labor are misappropriated for the benefits of capitalism,men do not control their bodies or their labor and thus are far from being independent even if they hold a superior status to women at home.Worse still,the delegation and rigid attribution of women to the domestic sphere for the maintenance of a worker’s home,taking care of housework and childcare,which have no economic value,work towards the consolidation of the capitalist system.No one is free or independent,regardless of sex.He Zhen does not surrender to the simplistic understanding of sexual oppression in which women are the only victims in society.Instead,in this regard,she is fairly sympathetic to men and emphasizes the necessity of liberating all oppressed groups.Communism is crucial to the realization of the emancipation of all humankind.

The firm belief in the absolute equality of men and women in intellectual terms leads He Zhen to propose a different design of women’s learning subjects.She approves medical learning because it helps the cultivation of fraternity among people,invites the learning of math and chemistry,and endorses agricultural learning,which is the pillar of collective welfare.As for commercerelated studies,they should be abolished because the financial system which bolsters the capitalistproletarian division will eventually be eradicated.Moreover,education programs to develop the necessary skills for military,police,and political positions should be discontinued as the national apparatuses of such institutions will become phased out in favor of anarchy and antimilitarism.

Patriotic education,supported by Qiu Jin,is therefore wholly displaced in He Zhen’s educational framework of He Zhen.In contradistinction to the idea that patriotic education is a way to spur the spirit of self-improvement in a bid for national independence,He Zhen discourages patriotic education as an instrument to reinforce the subservience in service of the state.Speaking against the militarization of Europe,the United States,and Japan,she insists that “the armed forces have been reorganized to serve and protect the government and capitalists,making any resistance by the people difficult.”36HE Zhen,“On Feminist Antimilitarism,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,170.Military forces prey on the least empowered people,such as women.Therefore,militarism not only incites national inequality,uneven distribution of power,and gratuitous violence but also escalates gender inequality,since military power builds on a labor system that assigns women to the domain of domestic service.At the same time,men manufacture arms and enlist in the army.Disapproving the national strength and military might of Western countries,He Zhen favors antimilitarism,which consolidates worldwide peace and security.

Rejecting patriotic education,He Zhen proposes communism as an indispensable domain of learning for women.In the article entitled “Lun nüzi dang zhi gongchan zhuyi” 《论女子当知共产主义》(On Women Should Know Communism),she explores why wives lack the courage to stand up against husbands’ violence.It is never out of fear for men that women flinch but out of fear for losing theirshengji生计 (livelihood).Shengjipresents “a radical critique of capitalism,modernity,coloniality,the state,and imperial tradtions.”37Lydia H.Liu,“Toward A Transnational Feminist Theory,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,22.Patriarchy has economical,institutional,and legal foundations.The deprivation of property perpetuates the subjugated status of women in society.State and government support an evil system in which means ofshengjiis controlled by men and therefore only men have rights to own property.Law stipulates that women own no property.In summary,the uneven power structure of gender has material and ideological basis.He Zhen considers that “the beginning of the system of women as private property is also the beginning of the system of slavery”38Quoted in ibid.,22.—an idea which is reminiscent of Engels’ connection of women’s subjugation to the advent of family and private property.The panacea that He Zhen offers is communism to dissolve uneven property relations sanctioned by government and the state.It is worth pointing out that He Zhen’s critique of property is in line with the historical anarchistic disapproval of property.For instance,Albert Libertaddeems private property as an evil,a source of self-interest.Are girls who earn their living through a meager wage considered self-reliant? He Zhen answers:“Because schools are opened by others,teaching in schools depends upon others’schools.Others also run factories,therefore,working in factories is living on the mercy of factory owners.There is little freedom in living by others.”39（清）何震：《论女子当知共产主义》，见《天义·衡报》，第168页。[HE Zhen,“Lun nüzi dang zhi gongchan zhuyi” (On Women Should Know Communism),in Tianyi Heng Bao (Natural Justice and Equity), 168.]To enable self-sufficiency and the resulting freedom for women,society must be recast and reorganized around communist principles in an anarchist framework.It deserves notice that He Zhen’s anarchist-communist vision is highly contingent on the advanced development of each individual.It can only be accomplished in society via the highest perfection,consisting of individuals with flawless human nature.In other words,anarchist-communism is a transcendent utopia.It is but with a leap of logic and an effort of imagination that He Zhen arrived at the equalization of labor and communalization of property.40WANG Lang,“French and Chinese Anarcho-Feminism in Early Twentieth Century,” unpublished manuscript.

This propensity to picture the “individual” as flawless and the insistence on the fullest development of individuals,women and men alike,falls in line with the general anarchist conceptualization of the human being.Both Chinese anarchists in France,like Li Shiceng 李石曾(1881—1973) and Wu Zhihui 吴稚晖 (1865—1953),and French individualist anarchists like Élisée Reclus and Émilie Lamotte,consider education as one of the most important anarchist projects and link education with the fulfillment of their overall political project.Education is revolution proper.However,the anarchist “human” is a perfect human,and the anarchist society is free from flaws.In this way,the anarchist conception of humans and society is limited to a conceptualized abstract form removed from the fleshy human being and concrete society.

On Marriage and Gender Equality

While there is little agreement on women’s educational matters,Qiu Jin and He Zhen share visible common ground on the debilitating injustice inflicted on women’s bodies and minds in feudal Chinese marriages.Both Qiu Jin and He Zhen reprimand the oppressive institution of feudal marriage and the enslaving sexual morality exclusively applicable to women,such as chastity.Their vehement attack is primarily articulated in three dimensions:the deprivation of marital freedom in the choice of partner,the wife and concubinage system,and the physical torture inflicted on women.InJingwei shi,Qiu Jin enumerates several social ills piled on the bodies and minds of women,among which she attacks arranged marriages most severely.Historically,the social practice of arranged marriages builds on the rigid seclusion of women as an instrument to promote the womanly virtue of chastity.Public visibility taints women’s reputations and the honor of their families.A woman strictly confined to inner quarters is regarded as exemplary of the highest virtue and can secure her status in a financially and socially advantageous alliance.Psychological deterrents of fear and shame (for dishonoring the family name) in tandem with coercive means of strict physical control imposed by the family confine woman firmly in the secluded area of the home.Since such confined women know virtually no men of their age and vice versa,they rely on parents to find suitable matches commensurate with their status—in other terms,the so-calledmen dang hu dui门当户对.Little concern is given to mutual affection,and the most weight is given to financial and social parameters.

Marriage is institutionally representative of class divisions and social hierarchies.Proponents of free marriage not only criticize the deprivation of choice in partners but also condemn marriage initiated for purely mercantile and utilitarian ends.Those sympathetic to free marriage give paramount importance to the pursuit of freely chosen love and come to see it as a struggle to liberate oneself from the grip of diabolical parents and a process to forge new modern subjectivities.Women,the most oppressed group,are the most combative in this assertion of new sociocultural identity.This indefatigable fight for new forms of self-definition finds increasing expression in the May Fourth movement in which love becomes the supreme force governing young women’s life.Nevertheless,it firstly begins with the elite women and men who subscribe to new thinking and come to see the free choice of partners as an unalienable right.Just as the seclusion of women played into the practice of arranged marriages,women’s increasing mobility and visibility in the public realm helped dismantle the premises on which arranged marriages are established.

He Zhen echoes Qiu Jin’s call for marriage based on love:“In a phrase,today’s marriage is not a marriage for love but marriage for money.In the classical texts of China,marriage for wealth is named as a custom of the ‘foreign barbaric peoples.’ Today,however,marriage for wealth has swept over the whole world;love is no longer an obstacle to the dominance of wealth.”41HE Zhen,“Economic Revolution and Women’s Revolution,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,103.However,the way to cure this social ill is not by dismantling structures of arranged marriages at the superficial level,but by the dismemberment of the system of private property and the collective share of all social resources.If financial differences between social classes could be eliminated,then money would cease to be the primary concern,and love would take precedence.

Qiu Jin and He Zhen’s denouncement of feudal marriage belies the egregious torments suffered by Chinese women.Classical Chinese cosmological thinking interprets universal operation based on the complementarity and opposing dichotomy ofyinandyang.The ensuing gendered dichotomy emerges from sets of binary oppositions.Susan Mann makes it clear that:“Male and female,in this understanding,are complementary categories.They do not exist in isolation from one another;rather,they are constantly interacting to produce the social order.”42Susan Mann,Gender and Sexuality in Modern Chinese History (London:Cambridge University Press,2011),29.This superficially complementary but inherently hierarchical mode of thinking attributes men to the public arena and demotes women to the domestic sphere conveniently.Many Confucianist classics work to reinforce the asymmetrical sex-gender-family structure.

Familial order is articulated through the maxim “husband guides wife;wife follows husband.”A Chinese woman’s individuality is subsumed within that of her male relatives.Marriage signifiesfufu he yi夫妇合一 (the fusion of husband and wife).“To the extent that wife is fused with husband,then the integrity of her character is annihilated.If wife succumbs to the will of husband on every matter,then there is no way to enjoy gender equality.”43陈东原：《中国妇女生活史》，北京：商务印书馆，2017，第141页。[CHEN Dongyuan,Zhongguo funüshenghuo Shi (A History of Chinese Women’s Lives),Beijing:The Commercial Press,2017,141.]The removal of woman from her natal family and her inclusion in the marital family are based on exchange value.This mobility does not exonerate her from daughterly obligations but maintains them while adding reproductive duties to the mix.Her biggest asset in this spatial transference is the ability to continue the family line by producing male descendants.Failure to do so would jeopardize her status in the new family.Popular rites and laws even go to such lengths as to stipulate that the failure to produce a male heir supplies grounds for divorce.

The wife-concubinage system invites further disparagement from Qiu Jin and He Zhen.Susan Mann notes that:

Concubines,who circulated in a separate channel of the marriage market,remained in the family system through contracts that joined them and their sexual services...A fecund concubine was ritually acknowledged at her death...However,she never acquired the prestige and power of a wife’s status because she entered the household on a contract,and the rituals she observed required her to bow to her husband’s wife,not his parents.44Susan Mann,54.

Hierarchical disparity innate in the wife-concubinage system makes their conflict of interest,particularly pronounced in a traditional Chinese household.However,in some instances,the power dynamics between wife and concubine can be complicated if the concubine wins the favor of the man.Qiu Jin stages the complex nature of wife-concubinage thoroughly inJingwei shi.The female protagonist,Huang Jurui 黄鞠瑞，is the daughter of a wife,whose power and status should outstrip a concubine’s ritually and normatively.However,her father,the magistrate Huang Gong黄公，“bought” a treacherous concubine who often sways the magistrate’s opinion to the disadvantage of Jurui’s mother and humiliates her.While the character Xiaoyu 梁小玉，Jurui’s best friend,is caught in a diametrically different situation.Xiaoyu is the daughter of a concubine who was bought into the family by the wife.The wife is depicted as acting magnanimously in public but treating Xiaoyu and her mother like slaves in private.Xiaoyu is also the victim of her brothers’(sons of the wife) beating and insults.The commonplace and varieties of animosities between wife and concubine belie the abysmal living conditions of women who have to rival with one another to secure their place in the familial realm.

However,it is particularly singular that what Qiu Jin sees in these conflicts is not the structural social ill of patriarchy or male inconstancy but the feebleness of women.Qiu Jin blames women for their benighted condition:“You always let men take the position of masters and put yourselves in the position of slaves.Because you want to rely on others,you do not possess a modicum of self-independence.”45（清）秋瑾：《敬告姊妹们》，见夏晓虹编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第97页。[QIU Jin,“Jingao zimei men” (A Respectful Proposal to Sisters),in Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan (Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen),ed.XIA Xiaohong,Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,97.]This undue imputation is not uncommon in the leading female revolutionaries in late imperial China.In discussing overseas Chinese female revolutionaries’attitude to masculine domination,Joan Judge affirms that:“All of these women were circumspect in their criticism of patriarchal institutions and masculine culture.They realized that they could not afford to offend male activists if they wanted to be recognized as national actors...Qiu Jin did not vilify men for their oppression of women;rather,she blamed women for having allowed this oppression to continue.”46Joan Judge,“Talent,Virtue,and the Nation:Chinese Nationalisms and Female Subjectivities in the Early Twentieth Century,” American Historical Review 106,no.3 (June 2001):797.Qiu Jin’s blaming of women for their role in the perpetuation of female slavery and her unwillingness to address her female compatriots as national citizens bespeak the concessions and detours early Chinese feminists had to make to achieve any level of success in women’s liberation.

He Zhen’s overt objurgation of patriarchal culture further diverges from Qiu Jin’s circumspection;more importantly,she does not merely blame women for complicity in the perpetuation of patriarchy;instead,she censures patriarchal institutions governed by men.In “Nüzi Xuanyan Shu” 《女子宣言书》(The Feminist Manifesto),she reproaches the fact that “our men practically treat women as subhuman beings” and that “men are the archenemy of women.”47HE Zhen,“The Feminist Manifesto,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,182.She cites Chinese men’s keeping of concubines as one of the enormous inequalities.Accordingly,she calls for the establishment of monogamous marriage.It is crucial to understand that He Zhen does not want to eradicate men’s privileges to restore women’s prerogatives but to erase the differentiated treatment of genders.Nor does she seek to expand women’s sexual freedom but to limit men’s sexual freedom strictly to the level of women’s.She writes,

If a man has more than one wife,keeps concubines or mistresses,or is predisposed to whoring,then his wife can use the harshest laws to restrain him,so much so that he would die by women’s hands.If a woman willingly serves a husband with multiple wives,the entire womenfolk would rise up against her.If a man only has one wife,but his wife has extramarital affairs,both men and women should rise up against her.48Ibid.,182.

Strict sexual loyalty and virtue apply to both men and women.Also,it is essential to note that He Zhen does not consider monogamy to be the cure for gender inequality but as the first sign of gender equality.Unlike her contemporary intellectuals who celebrate Western-form monogamy,He Zhen regards it with disbelief.She argues that under the surface of monogamy,a considerable number of married Western men visit brothels,and women are embroiled in adulteries.What He Zhen wants to construct is a virtuous world that limits sexual wantonness in place of superficial gender equality which allows both parties to commit sexual debauchery.

Where Qiu Jin sees the complicity of women in patriarchal domination,He Zhen sees various deplorable patriarchal institutions that compel women to prostrate in service of men.She summarizes three ideological instruments profusely used to foster subservience in women:Chinese characters,popular rituals,and Confucian scholarship.He Zhen begins by examining the composition of certain Chinese characters that carry the component of “女” (female).She argues that most characters made of this component carry pejorative associations,such as 奴，meaning slave.Regarding popular rituals,He Zhen points to weddings and funerals as the two social practices which embody the most injustice.She traces the origin of weddings to a form of robbery from natal families synonymous with female trafficking.As for funerals,women observe more protracted mourning than their husbands if their parent-in-law dies.If a husband dies,his wife is not allowed to remarry,and some widows go to extreme lengths to defend their chastity by suicide.In the meantime,He Zhen reprimands hegemonic Confucian scholarship,which consolidates patriarchic thinking in service of masculine domination.She enumerates a list of Confucian classics to substantiate her point,among themYijing《易经》(Book of Changes),Lienü Zhuan《烈女传》(Biography of Female Exemplars),andLiji《礼记》(Book of Rites).Lydia Liu argues that “He-Yin Zhen constructed her feminist critique from within—and against—the indigenous Confucian tradition,especially its theories of human nature.”49Lydia H.Liu,The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,15.In “Daode yu quanli”《道德与权力》(Morality and Power),He Zhen further analyzes the effective uses of morality:“Morality is the other name of power...Morality is defined by people in power and is the shield of the powerful...Power dominates people in visible forms,whereas morality disciplines people in forms invisible to the eye.”50（清）何震：《道德与权力》，见《天义·衡报》，第48页。[HE Zhen,“Daode yu quanli” (Morality and Power),in Tianyi Heng Bao (Natural Justice and Equity),48.]The Chinese language,popular rituals,Confucian scholarship,and dominant morality function in the way of “ideological apparatuses” identified by Louis Althusser,which help maintain the status quo and social order.

Apart from these non-coercive but highly pervasive and effective instruments,He Zhen suggests another kind of inequality uncharted by other Chinese feminists in her era:class divisions between women.In “Lun Zhongguo nüzi suo shou zhi candu” 《论中国女子所受之惨毒》(On the Brutalities Imposed on Chinese Women),He Zhen itemizes the horrific tortures inflicted on women of lower classes and elaborates on two unequal relations:first,between female masters and female servants,and second between female in-laws and child-brides.She proceeds to argue that this female domination over women of lesser status is itself a product of gender inequality.51（清）何震：《论中国女子所受之惨毒》，见《天义·衡报》，第218页。[HE Zhen,“Lun Zhongguo nüzi suo shou zhi candu” (On the Brutalities Imposed on Chinese Women),in Tianyi Heng Bao (Natural Justice and Equity),218.]It corroborates Lydia Liu’s argument,“He-Yin Zhen seesnannüas a mechanism of distinction or marking that has evolved over time,capable of spawning new differences and new social hierarchies across the boundaries of class,age,ethnicity,race,and so on.”52Lydia H.Liu,“Toward a Transnational Feminist Theory,” in The Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory,14.Thenannü男女,a way of constructing male-female differences,and normalizing and naturalizing inequality,serves as the prototype of uneven power relations in other forms.Women from privileged classes form a caste of themselves,reinforcing the dominating/dominated dichotomy.However,horizontally,women acquire less power than men of their social class.Women somehow form a “class” in a sense that is inferior,subject to limited powers,and that is nevertheless indispensable for the “class”of men.In this regard,I concur with Lydia Liu’s contention thatnannüalready involves a kind of class making,one that is more originally and primary than any other social distinctions.53Ibid.,17.That both “class” and “gender” should be incorporated into the critique of patriarchal and capitalist society as useful categories of analysis is an insight.In some way,it already signals the theoretical framework of intersectionality,which identifies various forms of social stratification caused by class,race,gender,age,religion,and so forth.Nannüasks us to see gender and class in separate terms.

However,thenannüproposed by He Zhen raises other important questions as a category of analysis:the inseparability of the two genders,the dependence upon the other gender to make the whole system function as a naturalized,legitimized entity.It is a complicated reciprocal relationship that resists binary dichotomy and simplistic generalizations.Indeed,Simone de Beauvoir has indicated the complexity of the female situation and the woman-man relationship:“The tie that binds her to her oppressors is unlike any other.The division of the sexes is a biological given,not a moment in human history...The couple is a fundamental unit with the two halves riveted to each other:cleavage of society by sex is not possible.This is the fundamental characteristic of woman:she is the Other at the heart of a whole whose two components are necessary to each other.”54Simone de Beauvoir,The Second Sex (New York:Vintage Books,2010),28—29.It is precisely the complementarity and reciprocity of gender relations that have trapped women to their inferiority and render complete emancipation from the male gender problematic.At the same time,it is equally important to realize that oppression imposed on the female gender does not necessarily make the other gender free.For instance,the normalized gender stereotypes represented by “femininity” and “masculinity” work against females as much as males.Men who fail to conform to the standards of the masculine are made to feel inadequate in the way any woman who does not perform her femininity is rendered aberrant,trivial,and marginal.

Conclusion

The fundamental difference between the two lies in Qiu Jin’s conception of woman as a“citizen” by proxy,or a mother of citizens,and He Zhen’s conception of woman first and foremost as a human being.While women are entitled to rights in Qiu Jin’s citizen/state discourse,women enjoy the full spectrum of rights in He Zhen’s subject/anti-state utopian discourse.While Qiu Jin’s conceptualization only makes sense in a national context,He Zhen’s “woman” is granted natural rights without the state.This radical difference governs their differentiated political thought,educational vision,and imagination of the state.Whereas Qiu Jin’s racial-nationalist feminism correctly serves the restoration of Han Chinese power,He Zhen calls into question the very founding principles and the domination of the state.While Qiu Jin advocates the popularization of women’s education following the lead of Liang Qichao,He Zhen regards the curriculum of women’s education with deep suspicion.What is the worth of women’s education if it only serves to reinforce patriarchal hegemony? If Qiu Jin wants to elevate the level of literacy among women,He Zhen proposes a new curriculum for women,firmly grounded in anarcho-communism.If Qiu Jin is intent on making Han China a military power,He Zhen wishes to demilitarize all nations and create a society shared equally by all.The competing discourses championed by them render the late Qing era fertile ground for exploring disparate ideologies and the richness of their legacy to the global women’s movement.

However,it is worth nothing that Qiu Jin’s nationalist feminism attracts far more scholarly and popular attention than He Zhen’s anarcho-feminism.Hu Ying 胡英 has convincingly argued that Qiu Jin’s martyrdom,executed under the Qing Dynasty,exhibits rich symbolic value for the making of the grand narratives of modern Chinese state.The memorial sites of Qiu Jin are“imbued with a powerful sense of historical authenticity and affective vividness and are thus a unique symbolic resource recognized and used by individuals,groups,and the nation-state.”55HU Ying,“Qiu Jin’s Nine Burials:The Making of Historical Monuments and Public Memory,” Modern Chinese Literature and Culture 19,no.1 (Spring 2007):142.In her continual commemoration,Qiu Jin is constructed as a cultural signifier,an embodiment of national emancipation and female autonomy.Her highly publicized death also contributed to her undying popularity among scholars and citizens alike.Unlike Qiu Jin,He Zhen is marginalized in the political and cultural history of China.Initially studied by Peter Zarrow,she was further discovered by Lydia Liu,Xia Xiaohong,and Liu Renpeng;however,scholarship on her remains minimal.It can be argued that this is first of all due to the general marginalized status of anarchism in China.Arif Dirlik has argued that anarchism existed only in trace elements.56Arif Dirlik,“Anarchism in Early Twentieth Century China:A Contemporary Perspective,” Journal of Modern Chinese History 6,no.2 (December 2012):131.To strengthen the nationalist discourse of China as a modern state,a theory which threatens to disintegrate any nation or government can only exist on the sidelines.It is no wonder,then,that He Zhen,as a female anarchist,suffers a double alienation:the alienation of an anarchist and a feminist.

The second reason can be attributed to her scandalous history as a political turncoat.He Zhen adhered to anarchism after she went to Japan,frequenting socialist circles in Tokyo.However,when she returned to China,she and her husband Liu Shipei famously served Duanfang 端方 (1861—1911),the governor of Hebei Province under the regime of Yuan Shikai 袁世凯 (1859—1916) and one of the highest profile officials.Their betrayal led directly to the death of Wang Gongquan 汪公权 (1883—1915).In 1915,Liu Shipei served in the administration of Yuan Shikai directly.He Zhen is often seen as the evil woman who caused Liu Shipei’s degradation.Liu Huiying 刘慧英 has demonstrated the ways in which He Zhen is portrayed as a frivolous and despicable woman who seduced her husband.57刘慧英：《从女权主义到无政府主义：何震的隐现与〈天义〉的变迁》,《近代文学与文化研究》2006年第2期，第202页。[LIU Huiying,“Cong nüquan zhuyi dao wu zhengfu zhuyi:He Zhen de yinxian yu Tianyi de bianqian”(From Feminism to Anarchism:He Zhen’s Disappearance and Presence and Change of Tianyi),” in Jindai wenxue yu wenhua yanjiu (Modern Literature and Cultural Studies) 2 (2006):202.]Legends about her promiscuity and psychosis abound.He Zhen exhibits neither moralistic nor patriotic value as far as her fickle personal and political history is concerned.

Nevertheless,to understand the richness of Chinese feminism,it is crucial to save He Zhen from the ruins of history.Her salient analysis ofnannüas a cultural and philosophical construct that has deep impact on the everyday experience of Chinese social relations and that solidifies patriarchy is still a source of inspiration for contemporary feminist theories.The co-existence of Qiu Jin’s nationalist discourse and He Zhen’s anti-statist thinking resist simplifying feminist categorizations and further attest to the vigor and heterogeneity of Chinese female intellectuals in late imperial China.

参考文献 Bibliography

CHENG Weikun.“Going Public Through Education:Female Reformers and Girl’s Schools in Late Qing Beijing.”Late Imperial China21,no.1 (2000):107—44.

de Beauvoir,Simone.The Second Sex.New York:Vintage Books,2010.

Dirlik,Arif.“Anarchism in Early Twentieth Century China:A Contemporary Perspective.”Journal of Modern Chinese History6,no.2 (December 2012):131—46.

HE Zhen.“Economic Revolution and Women’s Revolution.” InThe Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory.Edited by Lydia H.Liu,Rebecca E.Karl,and Dorothy Ko.New York:Columbia University Press,2013,90—104.

——.“On the Question of Women’s Liberation.” InThe Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory.Edited by Lydia H.Liu,Rebecca E.Karl,and Dorothy Ko.New York:Columbia University Press,2013,53—71.

——.“On the Question of Women’s Labor.” InThe Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory.Edited by Lydia H.Liu,Rebecca E.Karl,and Dorothy Ko.New York:Columbia University Press,2013,72—91.

——.“On Feminist Antimilitarism.” InThe Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory.Edited by Lydia H.Liu,Rebecca E.Karl,and Dorothy Ko.New York:Columbia University Press,2013,169—78.

——.“The Feminist Manifesto.” InThe Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory.Edited by Lydia H.Liu,Rebecca E.Karl,and Dorothy Ko.New York:Columbia University Press,2013,179—84.

HU Ying.“Qiu Jin’s Nine Burials:The Making of Historical Monuments and Public Memory.”Modern Chinese Literature and Culture19,no.1 (Spring 2007):138—91.

JIN Tianhe.“The Women’s Bell.” Translated by Michael Gibbs Hill.InThe Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory.Edited by Lydia H.Liu,Rebecca E.Karl,and Dorothy Ko.New York:Columbia University Press,2013,207—85.

Judge,Joan.“Talent,Virtue,and the Nation:Chinese Nationalisms and Female Subjectivities in the Early Twentieth Century.”American Historical Review106,no.3 (June 2001):765—803.

Larson,Wendy.Women and Writing in Modern China.Palo Alto:Stanford University Press,1998.

LIANG Qichao.“On Women’s Education.” InThe Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory.Edited by Lydia H.Liu,Rebecca E.Karl,and Dorothy Ko.New York:Columbia University Press,2013,187—203.

Liu,Lydia H.“Introduction.” InThe Birth of Chinese Feminism:Essential Texts in Transnational Theory.Edited by Lydia H.Liu,Rebecca E.Karl,and Dorothy Ko.New York:Columbia University Press,2013,1—26.

Mann,Susan.Gender and Sexuality in Modern Chinese History.London:Cambridge University Press,2011.

蔡元培：《蔡元培教育论集》，北京：中华书局，1984年。

[CAI Yuanpei.Cai Yuanpei jiaoyu lunji(A Collection of Cai Yuanpei’s Essays on Education).Beijing:Zhonghua Book Company,1984.]

陈东原：《中国妇女生活史》，北京：商务印书馆，2017年。

[CHEN Dongyuan.Zhongguo funü shenghuo shi(A History of Chinese Women’s Lives).Beijing:The Commercial Press,2017.]

陈顾远：《中国婚姻史》，北京：商务印书馆，2017年。

[CHEN Guyuan.Zhongguo hunyin shi(A History of Chinese Marriage).Beijing:The Commercial Press,2017.]

郭延礼：《秋瑾年谱》，济南：齐鲁书社，1983年。

[GUO Yanli.Qiu Jin nianpu(A Chronicle of Qiu Jin).Jinan:Qilu Book Publishing House,1983.]

（清）何震：《道德与权力》，载万仕国、刘禾编：《天义·衡报》，北京：中国人民出版社，2016年，第48页。

[HE Zhen.“Daode yu quanli” (Morality and Power).InTianyi Heng Bao(Natural Justice and Equity).Edited by WAN Shiguo and Lydia H.Liu.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2016,48.]

——：《论女子的教育问题》，载万仕国、刘禾编：《天义·衡报》，北京：中国人民出版社，2016年，第193—197页。

[——.“Lun nüzi de jiaoyu wenti” (Issues on Women’s Education).InTianyi Heng Bao(Natural Justice and Equity).Edited by WAN Shiguo and Lydia H.Liu.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2016,193—97.]

——：《论女子当知共产主义》，载万仕国、刘禾编：《天义·衡报》，北京：中国人民出版社，2016年，第167—169页。

[——.“Lun nüzi dang zhi gongchan zhuyi” (On Women Should Know Communism).InTianyi Heng Bao(Natural Justice and Equity).Edited by WAN Shiguo and Lydia H.Liu.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2016,167—69.]

——：《论中国女子所受之惨毒》，载万仕国、刘禾编：《天义·衡报》，北京：中国人民出版社，2016年，第217—222页。

[——.“Lun Zhongguo nüzi suo shou zhi candu” (On the Brutalities Imposed on Chinese Women).InTianyi Heng Bao(Natural Justice and Equity).Edited by WAN Shiguo and Lydia H.Liu.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2016,217—22.]

（清）康有为著，汤志均编：《大同书》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2019年。

[KANG Youwei.Datong Shu(One-World Philosophy).Edited by TANG Zhijun.Shanghai:Shanghai Classics Publishing House,2019.]

（清）梁启超：《附女学堂试办略章》，载舒新城编：《近代中国教育史料》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2016年，第218—283页。

[LIANG Qichao.“Fu Nüxuetang shiban luezhang” (Concise Principles for the Trial Opening of Girls’ Schools).InJindai Zhongguo jiaoyu shiliao(Historical Materializer of Education in Contemporary China).Edited by SHU Xincheng.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2016,281—83.]

刘慧英：《从女权主义到无政府主义：何震的隐现与〈天义〉的变迁》，《近代文学与文化研究》2006年第2期，第194—213页。

[LIU Huiying.“Cong nüquan zhuyi dao wu zhengfu zhuyi:He Zhen de yinxian yuTianyide bianqian” (From Feminism to Anarchism:He Zhen’s Disappearance and Presence and Change ofTianyi).Jindai wenxue yu wenhua yanjiu(Modern Literature and Cultural Studies) 2 (2006):194—213.]

刘人鹏：《何震“女子解放”与〈天义〉的无政府共产主义视野》，载杨联芬编：《性别与中国文化现代转型》，北京：东方出版社，2017年，第36—62页。

[LIU Renpeng.“He Zhen ‘nüzi jiefang’ yuTianyide wuzhengfu gongchan zhuyi shiye” (He Zhen’s ‘Women’s Liberation’ andTianyi’s Anarcho-Communist Perspective).InXingbie yu Zhongguo wenhua xiandai zhuanxing(Gender and Transformation of the Culture in 20th-Century China).Edited by YANG Lianfen.Beijing:Oriental Publishing House,2017,36—62.]

（清）吕碧城：《论提倡女学之总则》，载夏晓虹编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第49—51页。

[LÜ Bicheng.“Lun tichang Nüxue zhi zongze” (On the Principles of Advocating Women’s Education).InJinTianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan(Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen).Edited by XIA Xiaohong.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,49—51.]

（清）秋瑾：《警告我同胞》，载夏晓虹编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第86—90页。

[QIU Jin.“Jingao wo tongbao” (A Warning to My Compatriots).InJinTianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan(Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen).Edited by XIA Xiaohong.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,86—90.]

——：《敬告中国二万万女同胞》，载夏晓虹编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第84—85页。

[——.“Jingao Zhongguo er wan wan nütongbao” (A Respectful Proposal to the Twenty Million Chinese Women).InJin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan(Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen).Edited by XIA Xiaohong.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,84—85.]

——：《实践女学校附属清国女子师范工艺速成科略章》，载夏晓虹编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第91页。

[——.“Shijian nüxuexiao fushu Qingguo nüzi shifan gongyi suchengke luezhang” (Concise Principles of Qingguo Shortterm Women’s Normal School Affiliated to Practical Women’s School).InJin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan(Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen).Edited by XIA Xiaohong.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,91.]

——：《中国女报发刊词》，载夏晓虹编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第95—96页。

[——.“Zhongguo Nübaofakan ci” (The Inaugural Speech ofZhongguo Nübao).InJin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan(Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen).Edited by XIA Xiaohong.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,95—96.]

——：《大魂篇》，载夏晓虹编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第99—102页。

[——.“Dahun pian” (On Great Soul).InJin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan(Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen).Edited by XIA Xiaohong.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,99—102.]

——：《精卫石》，载夏晓虹编：《金天翮 吕碧城 秋瑾 何震卷》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2015年，第103—133页。

[——.Jingwei Shi(Stone of Jingwei Bird).InJin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,He Zhen juan(Volume of Jin Tianhe,Lü Bicheng,Qiu Jin,and He Zhen).Edited by XIA Xiaohong.Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2015,103—33.]

舒新城：《近代中国教育史料》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2016年。

[SHU Xincheng.Jindai Zhongguo jiaoyu shiliao(Historical Materials of Education in Contemporary China).Beijing:China Renmin University Press,2016.]

——：《近代中国教育思想史》，北京：商务印书馆，2014年。

[——.Jindai Zhongguo jiaoyu sixiang shi(A History of Contemporary Educational Thought in China).Beijing:The Commercial Press,2014.]

——：《近代中国留学史》，北京：商务印书馆，2014年。

[——.Jindai Zhongguo liuxue shi(A History of Studying Abroad in Contemporary China).Beijing:The Commercial Press,2014.]

夏晓虹：《晚清文人妇女观》，北京：北京大学出版社，2016年。

[XIA Xiaohong.Wan Qing wenren funü guan(Intellectuals’ Opinions on Women in the Late Qing).Beijing:Peking University Press,2016.]

——：《晚清女报中的国族论述与女性意识——1907年的多元呈现》，《北京大学学报（社会科学版）》2014年第51期，第118—132页。

[——.“Wan Qing nübao zhong de guozu lunshu yu nvxing yishi—1907 nian de duoyuan chengxian” (Nationalist and Racist Theory and Female Consciousness in the Journals of Late Qing—Plural Representations of 1907).Beijing daxue xuebao shehui kexue ban(Journal of Peking University[Philosophy and Social Sciences]) 51 (2014):118—32.]

张丽萍：《报刊与文化身份——1898—1918 中国妇女报刊研究》，北京：中国书籍出版社，2015年。

[ZHANG Liping.Baokan yu wenhua shenfen—1898—1918 Zhongguo funü baokan yanjiu(Journals and Cultural Identity:A Study of Women’s Journals,1898—1918).Beijing:China Book Company,2015.]