In the women of China the Communists possessed, almost ready made, one of the greatest masses of disinherited human beings the world has ever seen. And because they found the key to the heart of these women, they also found one of the keys to victory over Chiang Kai-shek.
Jack Belden
A CONFERENCE, like a drama, a party, a lecture, or a love affair is greatly enhanced by a change of pace. Ebb and flow, introversion and extroversion serve to keep the participants alert. Such a change was provided on April 29th by a special discussion on the problems of women. Switching attention sharply away from internal Party affairs, Secretary Ch’en asked every team to report on the mobilization of the peasant women in their respective villages.
“Even if you haven’t done anything, tell us about that and state the reason why,” he said. It was his way of keeping the issue alive. The cadres knew that they would be asked about women the next time as well; and the chances were, even if they had done very little in the past, they would have more to report in the future.
As a matter of fact, most of the team leaders made very good reports. Little Li’s account of the work in Long Bow did not match up. But that may have been because Li did not give the matter enough thought. Much had actually been done, especially by Ch’i Yun and Comrade Kao, the other woman cadre from the University.
The right to own land and property in their own name was the key to the liberation of women, according to all the cadres who reported. On many other questions the women were divided. While the younger women were very concerned about free choice in marriage, older women saw this as a threat to their control over daughters and daughters-in-law. While younger women opposed all family beatings, older women tended to countenance beatings just so long as mothers-in-law administered them. On one issue they all agreed, however. Women should be able to get and keep a share in the land.
In Chao Chen Village, many women said, “When I get my share I’ll separate from my husband. Then he won’t oppress me any more.”
In Chingtsun the work team found a women whose husband thought her ugly and wanted to divorce her. She was very depressed until she learned that under the Draft Law she could have her own share of land. Then she cheered up immediately. “If he divorces me, never mind,” she said. “I’ll get my share and the children will get theirs. We can live a good life without him.” Another woman in the same village had already been deserted once. Her second husband was a local cadre, but he oppressed her. When a member of the team visited her, she wept. “Chairman Mao is all right, but women are still in trouble,” she said. “We have no equality. We have to obey our husbands because our life depends on them.” After the new law was explained to her, she said, “This is really fine. I can have my own share now.”
In Yellow Mill, many women had no confidence in their powers. They said, “Our husbands regard us as some sort of dogs who keep the house. We even despise ourselves. But that is because for a thousand years it has been, ‘The men go to the hsien (county) and the women go to the yuan (courtyard).’ We were criticized if we even stepped out the door. After we get our share we will be masters of our own fate.”
Some were afraid that they could not do the field work necessary, but others said, “What difference does that make? Women depend on men, but so do men depend on women. What the women do around the home is also labor, and they can swap that for work in the fields.” One woman said, “Always before when we quarrelled my husband said, ‘Get out of my house.’ Now I can give it right back to him. I can say, ‘Get out of my house yourself.’ “
The more oppressed the woman, the more urgently did she demand her share. The women of Ke Shih said, “Child brides but no child husbands.” “If you even speak to another man, you would be suspected.” One child bride, sold at the age of seven, told how much • she had suffered from her mother-in-law and concluded, “When I get my share I’ll never look for a husband again. A husband is a terrible thing.”
In Chingtsun one old woman said, “I sold four daughters because I had to pay back a landlord debt. I wept the whole night, and the tears burned my eyes. Now I am blind. Poverty forced me to sell my own daughters. Every mother loves her child.” Others said, “In the old society no one loved a daughter because you brought them up and they left the house. Many parents drowned their little daughters. In the old society feet were bound with cloth. Small feet were thought to be one of the best qualities of women. But to bind a woman’s feet is to tie her body and soul. Small feet are a symbol of the old society.”
Many stories revealed that Liberation had not yet guaranteed free marriage or even the property rights upon which free marriage must be based. In East Portal one woman had been forced to marry a veteran. The cadres said, “This man has fought for us many years. How could we live a peaceful life if it hadn’t been for his efforts? We must reward him with a wife.” When the woman refused, she was ordered to explain herself at a mass meeting.
A second woman there wanted to marry a man from another village, but the local cadres would not give her a permit. Why make things difficult for themselves by further reducing the number of unmarried women?
Obviously, a lot of work still had to be done before women could call themselves really free. But from the reports we learned that in every village there were a few women who were starting to play an active role in public affairs. Large numbers had joined the Party purification meetings and almost all of them had learned to speak.
***********
At the county conference itself the women seemed to me to be far less bashful than the men. It was they who sought me out and asked questions about the world outside China. The women who did this were not, as might have been expected, the intellectuals from the University, but that small handful of local women who had distinguished themselves as district cadres in a movement still overwhelmingly staffed by men.
Meal breaks provided the only time available for such spontaneous discussion. Meals were served outdoors in the courtyard where the male cadres were quartered. The southern entrance to this yard consisted of an imposing central gate topped by a heavy tiled roof and flanked by two gate-houses, one of which had been temporarily converted into a kitchen. There a vast cauldron of millet was boiled up twice a day over a fire that looked like a blacksmith’s furnace. When the millet was ready (about eight o’clock in the morning and four o’clock in the afternoon), the cauldron was carried out into the yard by two stout men with a carrying pole. The cadres then lined up, each with his own bowl and chopsticks in hand, and proceeded to help themselves. So big was the circumference of the cauldron that five or six people could easily stand around it and fill their bowls without crowding one another.
A second, smaller fire in the gate-house produced a pot of cabbage. This was placed on the ground some distance away from the millet. After each cadre had filled his bowl with steaming grain he walked over and topped it with cabbage. Then he sought some place to sit or squat and eat. Small knots of friends formed at such times, and discussion flourished until the temple bell sounded the call to return to the conference sessions once again.
On the afternoon of the second day of the conference, I found myself the center of one of these meal-time discussion groups. A lively trio of village-born female cadres boldly approached me as I ate. Their spokesman, a young woman with bobbed hair and natural feet, asked me such a stream of questions that the millet in my bowl grew cold before I could get it into my mouth.
“Do you eat with chopsticks in America?” “What crops do you raise?” “Do American women wear pants?” “Why don’t Americans treat all races equally?” Such were the questions she asked.
The women no sooner began their “interview” than a number of men, most of whom had been too shy to approach me, also gathered round and added queries of their own.
“Why does Tu-lu-men (Truman) support old Chiang?” “What does a tractor look like?” “How big is the American Communist Party?” “Does it have an army like ours?”
The temple gong rang long before I had a chance to answer all of these questions. On the next day the discussion continued, and on the next as well, and always it was the women who took the initiative.