China campaign of the day

The Chinese government has ordered a boycott of “sissy pants” celebrities as it escalates a fight against what it sees as a cultural import that threatens China’s national strength.

In a directive issued on Thursday, China’s TV watchdog said entertainment programs should firmly reject the “deformed aesthetics” of niangpao, a derogatory term that refers to effeminate men.

The order came as Beijing tightens control over the country’s entertainment industry, taking aim at an explosion of TV and streaming shows that hold increasing sway over pop culture and the youth.

Young, delicate-looking men who display gentle personalities and act in boys’ love dramas have amassed large fan bases mostly comprising women. Many of them, like Xiao Zhan and Wang Yibo, are China’s top-earning celebrities.

They came in sharp contrast with the older generation of male stars, who were expected to sing revolutionary songs and play intrepid, aggressive soldiers defending the country from foreign enemies.

But the more gender-neutral aesthetics have come under criticism from conservative voices in society. Some officials and parents fear the less macho men on TV would cause young men to lose their masculinity and therefore threaten the country’s development.

Here is the full story, and I thank B. for the pointer.  As I said yesterday, I do get the point but such campaigns are not for me…

Comments

Weird to see how America's political leadership is so intent on gender bending and combating toxic masculinity at every corner. In theory the radical Marxist revolutionary regime should be doing that. How this plays out on a geopolitical level will be intersting as will the reaction from America's feminists.

Respond

Right now the regime in Pekking is probably best described as Conservative Socialism with Marxist characteristics.

Respond

Que es mas marxista: Xi Jinping o Joe Biden?

Respond

The Left would embrace any position as long as it was the opposite of something Trump said. I was surprised to see hard core leftists oppose pulling out of Afghanistan for instance.

Maybe China is doing the same? America embraces LGBTQ rights, and naturally China sees a way to distance itself from the Great Satan.

Or more likely Beijing sees what giving an inch to the LGBTQ lobby means and is determined not to go down that route.

Respond

For some reason the CCP leadership got better over time. Reasonable people rose to positions of power. And it's no surprise that the most successful Communist country is history is more conservative than our dying democracy.

Respond

Only someone filled with TDS would find Trump's suggestion of exploring curing covid through injecting disinfectant worth opposing. No other possible reason is imaginable except that the Left reflexively rejects whatever Trump proposes..

Respond

“In theory the radical Marxist revolutionary regime should be doing that.“

The early Bolsheviks tried radical experiments with sexual norms and family structure (see Kollontai and the zhenotdel), but backed off when there was an epidemic of STDs and abandoned women past their prime. The later Soviets did continue to push women to be more masculine in the workplace, but portrayal of Soviet men was consistently hyper-masculine, especially in statuary honoring soldiers of the war against fascism.

It’s almost as if being in stable power for a while forces you to face reality and be more pragmatic.

Respond

Supply and demand. This should be read in conjunction with this recent article on the rise in China of butler cafes (which have long existed in Japan), places where women can go and pay for time with attractive men who listen and prioritized their interests. https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1008384/chinas-hottest-new-rental-service-men-who-actually-listen

Seems reasonable. Also ties into this: https://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Beauty-Darwins-Forgotten-Theory/dp/0385537212

De gustibus non est disputandum - but we can certainly debate why there's demand.

Respond

In the past, societies with an excess of males due to selective infanticide almost surely guaranteed within a generation that war would be waged against outsider groups.

Respond

Guess I'd repeat a comment that this seems a tough hoe to row given the aesthetics of traditional Chinese high culture. They've got their civilized, unmartial gentry who obsessed with poetry and flowers and beauty for quite a long time. Revolutionary Socialism, by contrast quite the import.

On an aside, I expect to see a bunch of deeply pathetic "pro-China engagement" conservatives who have bemoaned Trump and Biden's trade warring with China because "the market is most efficient" to quietly ignore or else applaud this intervention into the market. (Because being consistently in support of markets isn't the thing to them, being against national greatness in the West and for the national greatness of the Chinese, that's their thing.)

Respond

"a bunch of deeply pathetic "pro-China engagement" conservatives ..."

I'm not sure the conservatives you describe actually exists. I haven't run into any, at least. Any conservative who admires China wants the US to be more like China, not for the US to bow down to China. Starting a "trade war" with China--trying to rebuild a strong domestic industrial base--would, in a way, be an example of emulating China. China does what they think is best for its people. Can the US say the same? I reject the zero-sum framing, but in a way Trump was right: "China is beating us".

Respond

I'm not sure China does "what they think is best for its people".
What they think is best for its current rulers, yes...

Respond

Knowing the true motivations behind any actor is often impossible, and I certainly am not familiar enough with Chinese politics to venture a guess.

In my opinion people aren't motivated by self-interest as much as you'd think, and to assume so, to think that this is always the case (as economists are wont to do), is often just projection. Even many bad people--very bad people--aren't motivated by self-interest, but by other ideals, however twisted.

Respond

Oh there are a few. What you describe is a bit more common and its relatively rare though I guess - they annoy me disproportionately to their numbers, and their generally pathetically marginal level of influence.

Respond

I find ritualistic the anti-China bromides among conservatives more annoying. There are lots of beams and motes obstructing the vision, sometimes. Of course the #StopAsianHate campaign was more annoying than all of this.

Respond

Nah, criticism of other nations, all else equal, is always better than criticism of your own.

Respond

The Vice article is insufferably woke with analysis from western "experts" on queer issues and gender politics.

Since the audience for sissy pants entertainers are mostly women, their corrupted tastes should be the main focus.

Respond

This (and your other article) are about different places/times demanding different people.

It's well within my lifetime that people who could do hard, manual labour well had reasonably high value. Men who could bash rivets into ships all day earned good money. We also valued police and soldiers higher in society. To be able to catch bankrobbers or to march for miles on end made you more valuable.

Then you start getting various changes and all of that stops being so valuable. The banks think up various security measures and bank robbery almost disappears. The end of the cold war and war in general leads to less demand for soldiering. People invent various power tools and robots and manual labour becomes less valuable.

Afghanistan is somewhere where being a physical worker, or a soldier are still of high value.

And the thing to always remember about all conservatives is that they are mostly living in their past. That doesn't always mean they're wrong, but they generally fail to understand and see the benefits of the way the world is changing.

We should probably recognise this story in itself as a bad thing, but that it shows a bright future. The people are industrialising. The conservatives might be able to hold them for a while, but conservatives generally have a bad track record of winning.

Respond

The roots of this campaign date back decades, and will likely earn considerable pushback. Some background, from me, written in March: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-03-14/chinese-leaders-tucker-carlson-tout-outdated-masculinity

Respond

Amazing isn't it, American conservatives fear the feminine no less than the Chinese government, and are sympathetic to the masculine if brutal Taliban. People from different places are not as different as we would like to believe. In a different context, I was thinking about this as I read a review of Sally Rooney's new book, Beautiful World, Where Are You.

Respond

Banning sissy males from TV doesn't matter much. It's not like watching guys act macho on TV actually makes men stronger or more masculine. The problem with TV and other forms of electronic entertainment is that you're sedentary, wasting time, and having your mind influenced by cynical managers who don't care about your well-being.

Much more significant is China legally limiting children's allowed time on video games to 1 hour per day. They should follow up by limiting television time and preventing people under the age of 18 from having smartphones. China already does a lot to limit porn, but it's still a problem so more needs to be done.

Respond

And there is nothing that gets the normal commenter worked up than talking about manliness, and the inherent superiority of manly men. Like themselves.

Respond

They are obsessed with talking about SF bathhouses and rampant gay orgies, over and over again.

Respond

Boy's Love? I looked at that article. The first TV show they mentioned was about a love affair involving high school boys.

That is, child porn. If you fly through a Western airport with that on your hard drive you would be risking serious jail time.

I don't think a ban is exceptional by Western standards.

Respond
Respond

Add Comment