A Chinese professor of sexology tells college students that the study of sexuality should be “patriotic” and “in line with the Party.”
by Chen Tao
Recently, a student at Central China Normal University（CCNU) provided Bitter Winter with a report of a conversation that took place on August 5 between Peng Xiaohui, a well-known professor of sexology at the university, and the officers of the Undergraduate Sexology Association of CCNU. In this conversation, Peng asked the students to resist “extreme feminism” and comprehensive sex education models from the West, accusing them of trying to subvert socialist culture, and asked students to support the leadership of the CCP when conducting sexology studies.
Here comes the translation of this report:
Talk by Professor Peng
Report date: 5 August 2021
Venue: By the tennis court, East District, CCNU
Interviewer: Professor Peng Xiaohui
Interviewee: Liao Shuang Xiong Yutuo
Rapporteur: Xiong Yutuo
On 5 August 2021, Professor Peng had a profound conversation with Liao Shuang and Xiong Yutuo, members of Undergraduate Sexology Association of CCNU, beside the tennis court in the East District of CCNU, about the handover of the Association, the direction of the Association’s development methods and the relationship between sexuality science research and the state.
Professor Peng offered us a number of practical and reliable solutions to the problems that have arisen in the transition of the association.
For example, Professor Peng suggested using the Internet to increase the publicity of the Sexual Science Association before the unified recruitment period arranged by the university, and using the official microblog to continue to operate as one of the main forums for our publicity. In terms of the development of the association, Prof. Peng suggested many ways to enrich the activities of the association, such as giving lectures, online classes, online discussions, museum tours, evening lectures by name, knowledge quizzes, etc.
In terms of enhancing the status of the association, it should be combined with the Chinese Sexuality Association, and with the support of both Prof. Peng, the vice president of the Chinese Sexuality Association, and the mentor of Undergraduate Sexology Association of CCNU, the association should be strengthened and expanded. Professor Peng also suggested combining Undergraduate Sexology Association of CCNU with the Guangdong Sexual Health Industry Professional Committee Conference, which would transform the operation of the Undergraduate Sexology Association of CCNU to a more flexible and modern way through an entrepreneurial business approach, but the restructuring of the Huazhong Normal University Society has eliminated all financial transactions between the on-campus society and off-campus organisations, making this a reserved suggestion.
Professor Peng then highlighted the issue of the Society’s developmental orientation purpose, which combined with the current prevalence of feminism and the introduction of the comprehensive sex education model in the country, highlighted the fact that the development of our Sexology Association should be carried out under the socialist path led by the CCP, not under the flag of extreme feminism steeped in Western gender politics, let alone the blind introduction of the complete Western model.
On the theme of the controversial comprehensive sex education model, Professor Peng transmitted to us a lot of profound truths around this theme, firstly, how to understand the current situation of gender inequality in the country and the infiltration of extreme feminism. What we need to do is to use scientific means that are in line with the historical stage of social development to promote the realisation of the social ideal of equality between men and women. On the one hand, extreme feminism in the West should be viewed rationally, not only because it does not fit China’s national conditions, but also because it is largely manipulated by political forces, and in fact exploits our ardent expectations for gender equality to carry out ideological infiltration and combat, and to carry out subversive activities of the existing socialist cultural system under the guise of gender equality.
The strongest evidence of this is the fact that domestic activist feminism had publicly expressed its supportive attitude during the riots of the local subversives in Hong Kong, and the uniform black-on-white costumes they had developed were identical to those of the Hong Kong subversives. So it is the duty of our university students, especially the sex science societies in universities, to shine a light on the cultural discourse when it comes to science education.
On the other hand, we oppose the blind introduction of comprehensive sex education not only because it is itself controversial in the West, but also because comprehensive sex education in many ways conveys ideas that are difficult for the Chinese people to accept. For example, the comprehensive sex education model allows for the transmission to young children of the freedom of choice that people have in their sexual orientation, but in the specific case of young people, whose minds are not fully mature, such sex education can easily make them lose sight of their true biological sexuality.
The idea of total freedom of choice in reproduction for women, for example, can also easily lead to lower and lower fertility rates. The adverse effects of stagnant or even negative birth rates in Western societies have already been seen, with the disappearance of population benefits, an ageing population, a reduction in social productivity, and the introduction of foreigners into the population, which has led to the intensification of ethnic tensions. Therefore, fertility is not only an individual right, but also an obligation. Without the continuation of population prosperity, there will be no continuation of the country, so we should approach fertility with a strong sense of patriotism, and if we do not even love our own country, we will not have the responsibility of being a socially responsible person.
So finally, Professor Peng talked to us about the relationship between the study of sex science and the state, “Don’t touch sex science without patriotism,” because sex science is actually related to every aspect of our national development, which is why the West, when it comes to cultural penetration, focuses on women who are related to “sex.” This is why the West, when it comes to cultural infiltration, focuses on the importation of feminist and comprehensive sex education models related to “sex,” because if this position is lost, extreme feminism and Western comprehensive sex education models that have gained a large number of grassroots people will make huge waves and bring a blow to all aspects of the country’s socio-economic situation.
We need to understand that the gains we are claiming today are the result of the revolutionary ideals of the revolutionary parties, especially the CCP, taking roots, and not the result of the introduction of Western feminism. The CCP has been working to achieve social equality between men and women since the founding of New China. As Chairman Mao called for, “Women can hold up half the sky!”
So with a spirit of patriotism, we must believe in the policies of the state, in its efforts and in the integrity of the Communist Party. We insist on a consultative democracy rather than an adversarial democracy, which is appropriate for our country. That is, we advocate the practice of gender equality, which must be pursued and practised under the flag of the CCP’s ideology on gender equality, reflecting our political direction and also coinciding with the social system, and our activities must reflect the will of the state, and we must not deviate from the national interest.
All in all, Professor Peng’s talk gave us a deep impression and brought us a new way of thinking. We hope that under Professor Peng’s careful guidance, we can raise our ideological awareness and better lead our association in the right direction.
This report is hereby presented.
The student who provided this report told Bitter Winter that Professor Peng Xiaohui is the mentor of the Sexual Science Association and that other clubs in the school are required by the university to have these types of talks on a regular basis. From this report, it is clear that the CCP is very hostile to feminist activists in the country and to sex education ideas from the West, and compares them to the protests in Hong Kong.
Irrespective whether Prof. Peng was right or wrong on the single issues he discussed, what is interesting here is the claim that sexology should be strictly controlled by the CCP.
Interestingly, despite Professor Peng’s strong praise for the CCP’s contribution to gender equality and his call for students to support the Party’s leadership, he himself has previously come under attack mainly from Maoist supporters within China, who see sexologists such as Peng and Li Yinhe as spokespersons for Western forces corrupting China’s youth.
Another student from the Undergraduate Sexology Association of CCNU, who belongs to a sexual minority, told Bitter Winter, “It actually doesn’t surprise me that Professor Peng Xiaohui spoke to students in this way, as he has previously attacked Chinese feminists and praised the CCP’s ‘achievements’ in gender affirmative action in class and on his Weibo account. I don’t know if he said this to protect himself or out of sincerity, but against the backdrop of the Chinese Communist authorities’ efforts to suppress sexual minorities, it still makes me feel very uncomfortable that Peng, as a scholar of sexuality, is so in tune with the powers that be.”