roddy Posted March 25, 2019 at 07:31 PM Report Share Posted March 25, 2019 at 07:31 PM 31 minutes ago, Zbigniew said: "In asserting only that an equal contribution from women is possible, not actual, Mao was hardly the feminist that many in the West took him to be". I'm inclined to agree with him. Hmmm. Couldn't it be seen as pointing out wasted potential? They might not be doing it, but can and should be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zbigniew Posted March 26, 2019 at 07:21 PM Report Share Posted March 26, 2019 at 07:21 PM 23 hours ago, roddy said: Hmmm. Couldn't it be seen as pointing out wasted potential? They might not be doing it, but can and should be? Yes. I think Link's point is that since Chinese women already were in some capacity holding up half the sky and had been doing for some time, using "can" doesn't give credit where it's due. His own words are: "It does not take a feminist to recognise that Chinese peasant women, in their many kinds of hard work, had already been holding up half or more of the sky for several centuries before Mao made his comment." Others here have said that "hold" instead of "can hold" has more force/is much stronger. I can only agree, but whether such a translation makes for an accurate representation of the (alleged) original utterance is debatable at best; on the analogy that, for example, telling your parents the new girlfriend/boyfriend you've just introduced to them "earns 100,000 RMB per month" would be likely to leave a very different impression from saying s/he "can earn" this amount per month, I'd say it doesn't. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.