Controversies over the “Boys · Girls” Sex Education Curriculums at a Local Elementary School in Chengdu Featuring Possible Gender Stereotypes
The sex education curriculums guiding children to “appropriately” identify their gender roles implied gender stereotypes and caused heated debate amongst Chinese netizens over how society should address gender identity and gender equality during children’s early development.
Since early 2019, Chengdu Caotang Elementary School Western District Branch has rolled out a series of sex education classes and activities titled Boys · Girls, Greatly Different (男生·女生大不同). The curriculums started with reading picture books that help children understand the mysteries of their bodies and the differences between boys and girls, such as The Secrets of the Human Body (《人体的秘密》), for girls, The Story of the Breast (《乳房的故事》) and the boys, The Story of the Little Chicken (“little chicken” is nicknamed slang for ‘penis’ in Mandarin Chinese) (《小鸡鸡的故事》).
Another goal of the curriculums is to lead children to explore their interests and hobbies through a variety of activities. “This is me” is a hands-on DIY class that encourages children to create images of their own on the drawing paper with materials ranging from petals, leaves to candy paper.
The influence of the curriculums has remained fairly local until a recent stage show unveiled at the school that spawned controversies and attracted internet attention. On September 9, children from the “Boys · Girls” program went upstage showcasing pieces of wool-woven work to their peers and teachers. The stage show is regarded by many as a launching event that introduces the school’s new gender-based program recently added into its sex education curriculums, including “Happily Knitting Yarns” (快乐’duo’毛线) customized for girls and led by the school principal Jin Fu, “Skillful Craftsman” (能工巧匠) designed for boys in making “airplanes”, “rockets” and assembling “cars”.
After the content of the gender-based curriculums was exposed, the school’s practice ignited a nation-wide debate on Weibo. Some netizens acknowledged the school’s good intention in teaching children the concepts about gender and identification but suggested that as an extracurricular program, it should respect individual preferences and let children choose whether they’d like to knit or craft.
Many interpreted the school’s method of arranging girls to knit sweaters rather than making rockets as discrimination against female children and is teaching them the modern “virtue class for women” (女德). Classifying children into “knitting” and “rocket-making” classes based on their gender is considered by many as an act of gender stereotype that was part of the old doctrines and today’s society should be rid of.
Some even described the school principle as pedantic and should be dismissed from her position to stop staining more young souls. A Weibo user named 不疯不寨主 filed a complaint on Chengdu Education Bureau official website and is waiting for an explanation.
While numerous netizens commented sarcastically that they would deliberately have their boys practice knitting and their girls learn how to make rockets, China Women’s News posted on their Weibo account the profiles of female scientists and engineers working at the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology as an opposing voice against the gender-based sex education curriculums in Chengdu.
When asked the original motive of the sex education curriculums, Jin Fu, the principal of the West District Branch of Chengdu Caotang Elementary School said “In recent years, we have found that boys and girls are being shaped by the same “mold”, causing boys to lack sufficient space to grow their masculinity, and the girls lack a quiet and gentle example to follow. There appears to be a gender dislocation between boys and girls. Therefore, the school began to think about addressing the differences between boys and girls in our sex education. After a series of investigation, argument and discussion, “Boys · Girls” curriculums came into being and was piloted amid second graders.”
To promote the “Boys · Girls” curriculums, the school also engages parents into its program through WeChat. For curriculums designed solely for boys, only their fathers are added to the group chat and are encouraged by teachers to communicate course content directly with their boys.
Some parents have expressed their appreciation toward the school for brewing an environment that helps nurture the “mountain-alike nature of boys and water-alike nature of girls” (男儿如山，女儿似水). Ms. Liu, the mother of a second-grade boy enrolled in the curriculums said to the media that the program addressed the different needs between boys and girls in their gender identity development and she wishes her son can cherish the opportunity, improve his hands-on ability and grow into a little man.
According to polling conducted by the Beijing News on Weibo, 55.2% of 7,402 netizens voted yes to establish gender-based curriculums spearheaded by the “Boys · Girls” curriculums and agreed that curriculums as such can enhance children’s gender identification.
Weibo user 康斯坦丁 provided reasons why he voted yes, which seems to be a shared concern among many parents, especially those of young boys in China. More and more young generation spent the majority of their time growing up with mothers or babysitters. Once entering kindergartens and elementary schools, they are taught by mostly female teachers. Fathers tend to play a relatively vague role in children’s life as they are often busy earning bread. As a solution, “Boys · Girls” curriculums help boys become more masculine and avoid becoming like Jia Baoyu, a principal character in the classic Chinese novel Dream of the Red Chamber known for his mother’s boy characteristic.
