Ambivalent effects of anger in Chinese feminists’ refusal to patriarchal marriage and family

ABSTRACT

Studies have shown that emotions play an important role in the emergence, unfolding, and demise of social movements. Many studies argue that anger is one of the most propelling emotions promoting movement participation, while others demonstrate the ambivalence of anger within social movements. Previous studies have suggested that the context in which emotions play a role in social movements remains underexplored. This study focuses on the self-organized feminist online space, where the political and private dimensions overlap, and contextualizes anger among online feminists who question the inferior position of women in patriarchal marriage, the family, and women’s low social status in contemporary China. Based on previous literature on emotions in social movements and methods of emotion discourse analysis, this study aims to deliberate (1) the subversive feature when anger is directed to the structure and opponents and (2) anger misaligned with other emotions in that its subversive power is suppressed. The findings revealed that anger represents subversive power when feminists oppose the source of injustice and confront their opponents’ denigration without fear. However, frustration, grievance, and pain come to the forefront when anger is suppressed in affective relationships. Additionally, when feminists successfully cope with emotional conflicts and emphasize the empowering side of their anti-marriage stance, their feminist identities are reinforced.

KEYWORDS:

• Emotions
• online feminism
• anger
• feminist identity
• marriage and family
• China

Introduction

In September 2020, a Tibetan woman named Lhamo’s ex-husband poured gasoline over her and set her on fire while streaming the incident live on social media. Before the attack caused her death, she had gone to the authorities and sought help multiple times only to be told domestic violence was a ‘family matter.’ Shocked by the case, many called for better safeguards against domestic violence and criticized the legal system and authorities for failing to protect women even after they sought help. Although China introduced the Anti-Domestic Violence Law in 2016, the penalties were minimal (Chen, 2020).

Lhamo’s case is an episode of the injustice experienced by many Chinese women. While not as fearsome as the physical harm within private confines, for many Chinese women, the concept of family does not signify mutual support. Instead, it represents a realm burdened with the weight of household chores and child-rearing thrust upon women, the expectations placed on daughters to wed and establish households, and the constant reminder of male family members’ superiority. Amid these circumstances, Chinese women use feminist theories to help them navigate their positions in the current social hierarchy, reframe events that occur around them through a gender lens, and attempt to establish alternative lifestyles to reduce patriarchal control over their lives. One of these attempts was by many young women to declare their refusal of marriage and family life. These young women gather on social media and anonymously share opinions on social news and personal experiences with their interpretations of feminist theories, underpinning the current Chinese feminist movement in which many participants engage in activities to demand changes in social conventions because of their lack of institutional routes. In contrast, the authoritarian regime usually excludes women from higher positions in government policymaking.

As noted by social movement scholars, emotion permeates all human activities, and social movements are no exception (Goodwin et al., 2000). After the dismissal of emotions in resource mobilization theory and new social movements theory was heavily criticized, emotions have been recognized as critical to social movements for more than two decades (Aminzade & McAdam, 2002; Flam & King, 2005; Goodwin et al., 2001; Jasper, 2011, 2018). Studies have found that emotions play a role in every phase of a social movement: emergence, development, division, and demise. However, discussing emotions in a universal context minimally contributes to the study of emotions in social movements. Jasper (2018) challenges the universality of emotion, proposing a sociological classification to distinguish different types of emotions: reflex emotions (quick responses to immediate environment), urges (bodily impulses), moods (persistent feelings that energize or de-energize across settings), affective commitments (long-term attachments or aversions), and moral emotions (feelings of approval or disapproval) (pp. 4–5). This typology attempts to address the gap between discussions about numerous specific emotions and overly general statements encompassing all emotions. It helps scholars deepen their understanding of the effects of emotions of each type and the interactions of different types of emotions in social movements. Other studies further this inquiry type by suggesting studying emotions within contexts, as they may lead to unpredictable outcomes in social movements depending on circumstances. This indicates that the role of the same emotion in social movements cannot be predetermined (Holmes, 2004; Roth, 2005; Weiss, 2021).

Take anger as an instance. Social movement scholars consider that anger is managed by participants to present their claims in a ‘reasonable’ way; otherwise, their claims might not resonate with the public (Ransan-Cooper et al., 2018; Whittier, 2001). For example, women, in general, are expected to show ‘niceness’; thus, female activists who unapologetically express their anger may make them the target of punishment (Holmes, 2004). However, especially within the movement groups, anger is perceived a powerful motivator, spurring participation in collective action to address pertinent issues (Rodgers, 2010). For marginalized groups, anger initially helps them realize their submissive status and inspires them to challenge oppressive social norms. Thus, by re-appropriating anger, it becomes a ‘subversive counter-emotion’ that, as defined by Flam, ‘social movements attach to their own members and direct toward the opponents,’ and ‘cause disaffection from the system’ (Flam, 2005, p. 20).

This study focuses on how the ambivalent effect of anger emerges regarding marriage and family issues within the Chinese online feminist community. I use the emotion discourse analysis approach to probe the ambivalent effect of emotions, as it draws on the understanding of emotion as social-cultural construct which is ‘about social life rather than internal states’ (Lutz & Abu-Lughod, 1990, p. 1–2; cf. Katriel, 2019, p. 57). This study identifies how anger is discussed, expressed, and evoked about issues of patriarchal marriage and family and highlights two aspects of anger in this case: (1) the subversive feature when anger is directed to the structure and opponents, and (2) anger mixed with other emotions in that its subversive power is suppressed. The findings revealed that anger represents a subversive power when feminists oppose the source of injustice and confront their opponents’ scorn without fear. However, frustration, grievances, and pain are common because anger is suppressed in affective relationships. Additionally, when feminists successfully cope with emotional conflicts and emphasize the empowering side of their anti-marriage stance, their feminist identities are reinforced.

The remainder of this paper is divided into five sections. First, I present a brief review of the role of emotions, especially anger, in social movements and focus on the ambivalent nature of emotions to foreground the theoretical frame. Second, I provide background on feminist movements in contemporary China and present a case study of the online feminist community. Third, I outline the research method applied in this study and how I used this approach to explore the ambivalence effect of anger. Fourth, I discuss how anger among feminists has subversive power and which emotions tend to suppress anger by comparing anger in different situations that emerged in the case. Finally, I reflect on the findings and present the study’s limitations.

The ambivalent effects of emotions in social movements

In response to previous criticisms regarding the neglect of emotions in social movement studies, scholars have come to acknowledge the omnipresent and crucial role that emotions play (Aminzade & McAdam, 2002; Flam & King, 2005; Goodwin et al., 2001). This can be partly attributed to the growing feminist perspective and development of the sociology of emotions (Eyerman, 2005). In the general life cycle of social movements, emotions trigger the emergence of protests, serve as goals and means of political action, and influence the unfolding and demise of social movements (Jasper, 2011). Among these emotions, anger helps socially marginalized groups reappropriate anger, thereby extricating themselves from feelings of self-destruction and guilt (Flam, 2005). For many inexperienced participants, engaging in social movements requires them to overcome emotions, such as helplessness and fear, by bringing out anger (Poma & Gravante, 2017). Other studies on the internal dynamics within social movement groups contend that love, trust, and loyalty help cultivate in-group affective ties and reinforce the movement’s solidarity (Taylor & Rupp, 2002). Meanwhile, movement members consciously engage in emotional work as part of their strategies to meet the public’s expectations to gain support (Groves, 2001; Whittier, 2001).

The question of interest is whether the same emotions can foster or dampen the development of social movements in different contexts. This inquiry type has been explored in studies focusing on in-group emotional dynamics (Gould, 2002; Holmes, 2004; Roth, 2005). For example, anger directs blame (Jasper, 2014) but sometimes disrupts movement members about whom to blame. As demonstrated by a study of the second-wave feminist movement in New Zealand, feminists often direct their anger toward men, as some believe that not blaming men represents a personal failure of feminist awareness. However, feminists resist anger toward other women because anger among women is perceived as divisive and an imitation of patriarchy; yet, they lose the perspective of the hegemony constructed by white or cisgender feminists (Holmes, 2004). As previously mentioned, love and trust help to build movement solidarity, especially when participants construct close personal relationships (Taylor & Rupp, 2002). However, when affective solidarity is limited to a small group of members who occupy higher organizational positions and have the privilege of accessing more resources, internal hierarchies are created, resulting in the participatory exclusion of peripheral members and newcomers (Roth, 2005).

Previous studies suggest examining how emotions lead to various outcomes. They have shown that the effects of emotion are not easily predictable. Additionally, picking out emotions in key moments, such as social movements’ emergence, sustainment, and demise, barely helps advance our understanding of this topic. Weiss (2021) proposed identifying contextual features that shape the outcome of a specific emotion and theorized ‘emotional attribution’ as an interactive process to help predict the various results brought about by emotions. This approach broadens the focus range on emotions in social movements and encourages scholars to explore emotions at various sites and their interactions within movement activities. Benski (2010) proposed the concept of ‘constellations of emotions’ to describe the ‘constellation of congruent emotions’ in which different emotions work in the same directions that amplify the expected behavioral consequence and the ‘constellation of non-congruent emotions’ in which behavioral consequences differ from expectations (Benski, 2010; Benski & Langman, 2013). For example, in a study on the anti-coal seam gas movement in Australia, Ransan-Cooper et al. (2018) demonstrated that politeness in rural culture helps different groups manage anger within the movement and construct alliances, thereby sustaining the momentum of the movement. The different ways of expressing anger between feminists and conservatives, as shown by Whittier (2021), impede the construction of alliances in work against pornography, even though they share empathy toward victims. While Benski (2010) distinguished the ‘congruent and non-congruent constellations of emotions,’ which is valuable for investigating the effect of different emotions, she did not distinct emotions at different sites or levels. In this vein, Jasper’s (2018) typology of emotions of protest can advance this kind of empirical inquiry, as shown by the above research that ‘background’ emotions, especially affective commitment and moral emotions, play an important role in activities engaged by participants.

In summary, while anger is generally considered a powerful motivator for movement participation, the roles of emotions are often not determinable according to the contexts in which emotions emerge. Therefore, scholars must evaluate how emotions are discussed, evoked, and expressed through interactions with other types of emotions. This study combines the concepts of Benski’s (2010) ‘constellations of emotions’ and Jasper’s (2018) typology of emotions, especially the interaction between affective commitment and moral emotions, to explore how anger interacts with other emotions in different situations experienced by feminists, thus fostering or suppressing its subversive power in this case. Specifically, this study elucidates how the ambivalent effect of anger emerges within an online feminist community by focusing on how feminist anger is subversive and suppressed in interactions with other emotions.

Background and case selection

Legitimate and organized political campaigns have been disregarded for decades in China. This situation further constrains the capacity of feminists to raise awareness about gender equality and promote policy changes through institutional routes. Consequently, many feminists are left to ‘protest with only their bodies and emotions’ (Zeng, 2014, p. 42). Besides, the expanding economic disparity between men and women resulting from the advancement of marketization, the increasingly flagrant misogyny prevailing in commercial advertisements and public speeches, and the rise of conservativism all contribute to pushing feminism to the ‘extreme’ end of the ideological spectrum (Zeng, 2016). In short, the feminist movement in China currently faces a fierce online and offline backlash, mixed with gender-based antagonism and ideological conflicts between official institutions and ordinary people.

Meanwhile, opinion exchanges on social media comprise a fundamental part of the current online feminist movements. Based on networked communication, young feminists apply a feminist lens and actively exchange opinions in response to gender-related social events. Debates on social media presented in a public setting generate a bridge between the private and public realms, transforming the private experience into public reality. In this process, personal narratives that draw heavily on concrete and emotional experiences instead of abstract ideas facilitate the generation of compassion, which may be transformed into a moral standpoint and, in turn, make collective action possible (Wahl-Jorgensen, 2019, p. 77–79). Among many popular platforms used by online feminists in China, Douban initially intended to build online communities based on hobbies or niche interests so that users could share their opinions and ideas with like-minded people about books, films, music, and other genres. The website is also known for having some of the feminist communities that are renowned for their ‘radical’ opinions that encourage women to oppose patriarchal values. However, in 2021, dozens of radical feminist groups advocating against marriage and reproduction were abruptly shut down overnight by the platform’s parent company, sparking suspicions that the company succumbed to pressure from government authorities (Li, 2021; Zhou, 2022). Under growing censorship, many turned their groups private so that only members could view them.

In this study, I selected a private women-only feminist group with more than 10,000 members whose earliest post can be traced back to June 2020, which means that this group survived mass censorship in April 2021. The feminist group states in its mission that it is committed to serious discussions on feminism. Moreover, the group encourages its members to share feminist books and writings and use their knowledge and daily life experiences to develop their own feminist theories. This makes the group articulate current online feminist ideas better than other gossip- or profession-oriented groups. As its member-and-women-only communication environment lacks oppositional interruption directly from the external environment, the feminist group suits the study’s goal of investigating the anger experienced by participants in their daily lives and that which emerges within online groups. I initially collected all article titles in the community posted from June 2020 to December 2021 using DataMiner, totaling 1,031 entities, and identified the most frequently meaningfully connected copras, including marriage and family, by applying KH Coder, a quantitative text analysis software. All articles analyzed in this study were manually downloaded as PDFs because of the censorship embedded in Douban’s search function. For this study, I selected 79 articles regarding marriage and family, with five or more replies, comprising 13.1% of the primarily selected sample and 7.7% of the total. All selected articles were categorized based on the targets of feminist anger and examined using the emotion discourse analysis approach. All translations of quotations were conducted by the author. This study eliminated screen names or any other information that may lead to the identification of users and groups due to privacy considerations.

Method: emotion discourse analysis

This study adopts a social constructionist approach to emotions, which emphasizes that objects or topics of emotion are established through interactions of social life. Emotions derive meaning from actors’ experiences and appraisal of situations within social relationships and contexts (Hochschild, 1975; Kemper, 1981). In situated practices, discourse plays an important role in shaping emotional experiences (Lutz & Abu-Lughod, 1990; cf. Katriel, 2019). The emotion discourse analysis approach, informed by this perspective on language and emotion, is utilized to explore emotionally laden discourses. As suggested by Katriel (2019, pp. 57–58), I analyzed feminists’ (1) discourse on emotion, which focuses on how they discuss emotion explicitly; (2) emotional discourse, which refers to their narratives laden with emotion; and (3) emotion-evocative discourse, that is, what and how emotions are evoked both in their daily experiences and in-group interactions with other members. Katriel argues that studying the language of emotion is one of the most suitable ways to shed light on specific ‘emotional configurations’ that ‘inform the discursive construction and negotiation of self-identities, social relationships, and moral sensibilities’ (Katriel, 2019, p. 58), which are also essential concepts when studying emotional dynamics in social movements. In the following sections, this study presents key findings from the analysis of online feminist emotion discourses, focusing on how anger toward patriarchal marriage and family in Chinese society is shaped by participants’ daily experiences as women and feminists encountering fellow feminists, family members or relatives, acquaintances, and strangers, and how feminists demonstrate anger as a subversive power and suppress anger in different situations.

Findings

Participants in the Chinese online feminist group demonstrated anger through interactions with various emotions. The following sections detail the subversive power of anger when presented as righteous anger toward the source of injustice – the marriage system in this case – and align it with misandry and humor when feminists confront opponents. On the other hand, anger is often suppressed when feminists experience emotional conflict within family relationships. The analysis also revealed a combination of anti-marriage stances and feminist identities.

Feminism and the subversive power of anger

In this group, feminists barely explicitly discussed their emotions in the articles posted on the marriage system. Many have adopted a rational tone to present feminist theories to justify their perspectives instead of overly drawing on personal experiences to underpin their arguments. However, anger pervaded in their condemnation of the injustice inherent in patriarchal heterosexual marriage, forming the bulk of emotion-laden discourses. Studies have shown that recognizing injustice is essential to collective action and helps legitimize righteous anger toward the source of injustice (Gamson, 1995; Hercus, 1999). This feeling of injustice is largely built on the feminist theorization of marriage, centering unjust practices in the public and domestic spheres in Chinese society. The following section presents examples of how feminists articulate righteous anger through their theoretical discussions of patriarchal marriage.

Righteous anger toward the patriarchal marriage system

In this case, feminists regard marriage as a systemic oppression of women, often using one of the widespread catchphrases created in the Chinese online feminist movement: ‘Marriage is slavery in the clothing of civilization.’ Frequently quoting Engel’s The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State (1884), online feminists state that marriage is designed to control women as a reproductive resource and ensure that every man has the chance to possess a slave. They maintained that the institution of marriage was established for men to consolidate their wealth, status, and power over their wives (and concubines in feudal China) and children, imposing moral codes based on Confucianism, such as chastity, filial piety, and obedience upon subordinates in their families. An online feminist commented that marriage builds a hierarchy in which men are guaranteed superiority in the domestic arena, even if their social status is low.

A man may be a pauper possessing little family fortune or a proletarian who benefits only from production with his salary. However, as a member of the group ‘men,’ half of the population who enjoy the advantage of existing wealth and production materials, he becomes a ‘ruler.’ Thus, he embodies a sense of superiority over women, both materially and mentally. […]. Although children enter the world through their mothers, they conventionally follow their fathers’ surnames. Women, on the contrary, only wait and expect the distribution of their children’s ‘ownership’ [according to men’s will]. (18 November 2021)

Another catchphrase often used by online feminists to refer to marriage is legal surrogacy, which refers to the difficulty of women making independent decisions on whether to bear children, even though the law stipulates that only women’s reproductive rights form the foundation of reproduction. In other words, it is socially assumed that once women are married, their decisions to have children will inevitably be influenced by their husbands’ and parents-in-law’s will, connecting to the logic that children following their fathers’ surnames (boys in particular) are considered to belong to the patrilineal family and bearing children for the family is seen as a wife’s obligation in Chinese society. However, the family status of women remains low despite their dedication to their nuclear or extended families. It involves enduring physical and mental strain from childbearing and committing more time to housework and care work than their male partners, since these are labeled as ‘women’s work.’ Additionally, women frequently encounter the motherhood penalty within the workplace, such as barriers to promotion and arbitrary termination of employment during pregnancy or after childbirth. Alongside the official propaganda increasingly emphasizing family values and women’s role in care work in the domestic sphere, young women realize that marriage will not benefit them in the ways that social conventions tempt and, on the worst occasion, could put them in danger, such as domestic violence and even homicide. Online feminists find that these conventions and the consequences of marriage prove that patriarchal families and societies do not prioritize women’s interests or take their sacrifices for granted.

In conclusion, online feminists regard marriage as a mechanism for preserving the dominance of men at home, thus prolonging the existence of the patriarchal social order. They emphasize the exploitative nature, which is the origin of injustice embedded in the marriage system, with supporting evidence of how imbalanced power is wielded and persists in contemporary society. Recognizing injustice stimulates feelings of righteous anger and encourages feminists to act according to what they perceive as right. One way to resist disadvantages that further erode their lives is to refuse marriage. Many Chinese feminists have declared their anti-marriage stance and have been criticized as ‘extremists’ who hate men and refuse to marry. Thus, feminists received backlashes and sarcasms from men and some government propaganda outlets, in which single women were denigrated as ‘leftovers.’ The next section focuses on how feminists use anger and humor to deal with discriminatory discourse.

Misandry and humor

Previous feminist studies pointed out that stigmatizing feminists as ‘men-haters’ has historically been an anti-feminist stereotype and a means for opponents to delegitimize feminism by depicting men as the victims of a tyrannical project which pursues women’s domination (Védie, 2021). If not hatred, feminists in this online community show obvious mistrust toward men in general, even men who claim themselves to be progressive or ‘male feminists.’ It is known that many feminist activists in the second-wave feminist movement were also former participants in labor or student movements. Yet they often felt disrespected by their male activists and finally decided to create their own movement (Traister, 2018). Like their counterparts in Western countries, women at the time of the socialist revolution in China had a similar experience in that their male comrades turned out to be enemies who monopolized important political and social positions once the external threats of the nation were gone. Reflecting on history, one member posted an article revealing the hypocrisy of left-wing men and explaining why progressive women should cut ties.

Regarding class conflict, proletariat men are angry and want to destroy all capitalists. However, when it came to gender conflicts, they oppressed women and wanted to silence them. […]. They clearly know their interests here and do not want to lose a caregiver, house cleaner, womb, sex slave, or the object of their violence. So, these men condemn women who have already awakened and started to rebel, attempting to shame them by calling them ‘extremists’. (5 February 2021)

The strong stance of excluding men from feminist struggles is also exemplified by the interaction of a few members in their replies to an article titled, ‘Men who self-claim to be supporters of feminism but want to marry women are most disgusting.’ As a women-only online community, it intends to create a free space for women to express their opinions. However, few male users participate in feminist conversations. In one comment, a male user self-identified as a supporter of feminism and elaborated on how he and his girlfriend were economically independent and had no interest in marriage. He also asked for the opinions of other feminists regarding this personal decision. Some feminists replied, ‘How about reading the group’s [women-only] principles first? My advice for you is “get out” (25 November 2021)’ and they refused to further engage in the conversation.

As the previous quotation pointed out, many men are offended by women who refuse marriage and motherhood. An article titled ‘Why men are explosively angry when hearing we say anti-marriage and anti-motherhood keep you safe?’ explained that women take an anti-marriage stance partly because they want to avoid risks in intimate relationships, including domestic violence and homicide, as in the case presented in this paper’s introduction. However, instead of addressing structural problems such as domestic violence, many men tend to overemphasize marriage’s importance, often driven by implicit sexual anxieties. In a screenshot article from another social media platform attached to the post, the male author chastised online feminists for oppressing men of middle and low social classes and economic status to boost women’s gender prestige, and stigmatized media and commercial brands which showed a supportive stance to feminism as a ‘foreign power.’ Among the feminist members’ comments, one which received 99 likes, wrote:

Many people know that men (1) have no sympathy, (2) have no morality, or (3) are selfish and self-interested. (7 July 2021)

Other posts that discriminated against unmarried women were screenshotted and posted within the feminist online community. This action exasperated members and led to strong criticism of the original author, who was assumed to be a man. In a series of screenshots, the male user, receiving 1,540 likes agreeing with him, enumerated the disadvantages and difficulties that women who live alone might face, such as ‘no one cares about them’ and ‘will die alone,’ then jumped to the conclusion that women should lower their standards for a spouse because the critical bargaining chip in marriage – women’s youth and beautiful appearance – will finally fade away, so ‘even finding a barely tolerable husband is better than having no husband.’ The screenshots irritated online feminists because the author believed women to be an accessory to men and tried to brainwash them to enter marriage, and because many people agreed with the author. One member who received the most likes pointed out men’s narrowminded and laughable assumptions about unmarried women’s lives, while others straightforwardly displayed sarcasm.

Wait, is a husband a trophy? What is it supposed to mean that unmarried women are losers in competition? Come on, at least we should compete for a better award [than a husband]. (23 December 2020)

In conclusion, by collectively framing the exploitative relationship embedded in patriarchal heterosexual marriages and thus perpetuating gender injustice in the family and society, feminists cultivate righteous anger toward the marriage system, which is viewed as the cause of their inferior status. In this online community, righteous anger propels many Chinese feminists to refuse marriage and motherhood as a form of resistance and commitment to their beliefs. Even feminists who faced derogatory treatment from men found their righteous anger helped them overcome fear and confront the shame imposed on them: ‘There’s no need to fear men’s verbal abuse’ (5 February 2021). The female-only online community serves as a ‘free space’ (Polletta, 1999) for feminists to express their anger without external interruption. By sharing misogynistic remarks on the Internet in feminist communities, many members learned to be skillful in confronting gender-discriminatory speech using their own terminology with humor and confidence. As noted in Védie (2021), the misandry claimed by feminists exists prominently in metaphorical or symbolic dimensions and enables women’s empowerment. In this sense, the righteous anger, misandry, and humor demonstrated by the feminist discourses in the online group aligned with each other. Thus this ‘constellation of congruent emotions’ (Benski, 2010) reinforces members’ confidence and feminist beliefs, empowering them to cut ties with the unjust marriage system and be free from men’s judgment.

Anti-marriage stance and feminist identity

Feminists in this online community often combine anti-marriage stances with feminist identities. However, gender-discriminatory speeches or behaviors reaffirming women’s inferior status in the family of orientation challenge their feminist identity. Additionally, when feminists who strongly uphold the nexus between an anti-marriage stance and feminist identity encounter disagreements, they shift from discussions on the structural problems of marriage to discourses on self-responsibility. The next two sections elaborate on how feminist anger is suppressed in family relations and the tensions within the group regarding the relationship between the anti-marriage stance and feminist identity.

Suppressed anger in family relationships

The implicit or explicit gender discrimination expressed by family members often frustrates young feminists, resulting in grievances and pain. As daughters in patriarchal families, their feminist identity is constantly challenged by their family’s actions, implicating male superiority. It is difficult for many women to accept that ‘men are superior to women’ has been instilled in their parents’ thoughts and practices, which is interpreted as replicating oppression against women. Some online feminists try to communicate with their parents about their feminist ideas, in turn receiving blame for being ‘radical’ or denying women’s unjust situations, which results in young feminists giving up on efforts to persuade parents. Some participants shared their experiences of how their parents preferred boys to girls. After failed negotiations and being blamed for overthinking unfair treatment, the feminist confessed her feelings and asked for advice from the group.

I used to believe parents have the right to prefer one kid over another, although it is hard to accept the fact. […]. Children often develop illusions in families that prefer sons, although not to an extreme extent, and where parents’ love is not completely absent. Perhaps it is because I have been suppressed myself for so many years; I just want to plainly express my feelings, […] though the insufficient affection still hurts me, so I cannot come up with words to articulate it. (3 June 2021)

Some feminists showed particular confusion as to why mothers as women, who must have experienced mistreatment and discrimination in their lives, cannot understand women’s disadvantages in the family and society but instead try to instill the same patriarchal discourses in their daughters’ minds. Such gender discrimination and incommunicability on gender injustice in the family are sometimes the first steps toward awakening feminist consciousness. However, affective ties between families suppress direct expressions of anger, often leading to bewilderment and pain. Another emotional consequence is the inability to express genuine emotions, as demonstrated in the above quotation.

The feminist anti-marriage stance is also a reason for emotional conflict among family members. A Chinese proverb states, ‘Every man and woman should get married upon coming of age,’ whereas the actual situation in modern society derails traditional expectations. With marketization and modernization in China since the 1980s, the tendency of women to marry at an older age or remain single has become evident, especially in urban areas and large cities. However, some online feminists’ anti-marriage stances are based on feminist beliefs and built on their collective framing of marriage, as presented in the previous sections of this paper. Their refusal to marry typically results in parental opposition. Many parents worry that their daughters may feel lonely when they get older and are cared for by nobody. Yet, they express anxiety by blaming daughters for being selfish and only considering enjoying their careless lives. A few parents firmly believe that getting married is an unavoidable mission for a woman and even forcefully arrange dates for daughters. One feminist confessed to emotional struggles about her relationship with families, which also exhibited affective ties among family members that resulted in her grievances instead of blunt anger:

I am the only child and daughter. […]. They love me and dedicate much to me. We are close to each other and have few secrets. However, sometimes I see other parents tolerate their children’s choice of not getting married or having children, and I feel a grudge. Why my parents not have an open mindset? […]. Sometimes, I doubt their love because marriage and having children seem more important than my happiness. Parents are so arrogant and […] they are selfish, too, imposing things that I do not really want. (11 May 2021)

The practice of dismissal or enforcement by a superior in the family can be interpreted as an embodied sense of authority identical to the characteristics of patriarchal hierarchies that demand compliance from subordinates. Although the emotional conflict between affection and grievance toward families often causes emotional fatigue, another feminist attempted to resist parental pressure by solidifying her anti-marriage stance and linking it to her feminist identity.

My parents asked what is meaningful in my life if I do not have children. Nothing is meaningful. Living is painful, and being their daughter is suffering. I do not want to have children because I am not only a feminist, but I do not want to become a parent like them. (8 August 2021)

To conclude, these narratives of personal experiences showed that affection toward parents and thus suppressed anger caused emotional conflicts or the ‘constellation of non-congruent emotions’ (Benski, 2010) that generated emotional consequences such as bewilderment, frustration, and grievance. To cope with the external pressure that urges women to enter marriage and avoid confrontation with their families, feminists in this community confessed to their emotional struggles, sought support from group members, and solidified their identities as feminists.

‘Can a married woman be a “real” feminist?’

The nexus between anti-marriage stance and feminist identity serves as a coping strategy to resist parental pressure for some feminists and a significant remark of feminist qualification for others who claim that a married woman cannot be a ‘real’ feminist. In other words, one’s marriage or partner status is a criterion for judging whether one is a ‘real’ feminist, given that many feminist members have explained the imbalanced power relations within marriage and family, as well as the structured punishment imposed on married women. A feminist again emphasized the hegemony of heterosexual marriage in society when another member asked why marriage and feminism were considered incompatible.

Do women have the freedom to choose not to marry? Your parents urge you to marry, relatives talk about you [being single], and there are news reports on marriage and birth rates. Most people believe that marriage and family are necessary. […]. These facts provide a basis for further discussion. You think that marriage does not exploit women and that women have the freedom to not marry. However, I think the opposite is true. (16 October 2021)

While some feminists emphasized their opposition to marriage because the romantic love ideology ‘seduces women to enter into marriage without knowing what they are going to deal with’ (21 November 2020), other feminists did not see eye to eye with feminists whose stance is not solid. A member wrote a post openly calling out feminists in the group who hesitate about marriage to ‘get out of our happy home!’ (25 October 2021). Another replied sarcastically, ‘They should find their kind of married people instead of asking single women to build solidarity with them. […]. I definitely will not interrupt their project of “married women for feminism” ’ (26 October 2021). Among other articles and replies, some feminists showed resignation to engage this topic by simply saying ‘Respect. Wish you the best’ (16 October 2021) and ‘I do not want to understand the opinions of an idiot [cigarette emoji]’ (25 October 2021).

These examples demonstrate anger in the form of hostility and refusal toward in-group members who still hesitate to marriage and present tensions between the anti-marriage stance and feminist identity. Using cigarette emojis signifies tiredness and resignation that some feminists may experience. This finding coincides with Hercus (1999) that some feminists felt resentment toward newcomers whose ‘feminist consciousness’ was not considered to be sufficient.

However, instead of antagonism, some remarks encouraged women to believe in their power to choose an unmarried life, reinforcing their feminist identity. One member interrupted other hostile comments and replied:

Feminists must believe in their own powers. You can live a life without marrying a man. Caring for families and children is not effortless. If you are not afraid of getting married [into that], you should not be afraid to live independently. You are afraid to think about them. (25 October 2021)

Not everyone adopts an anti-marriage stance with few emotional struggles. A feminist confessed that she had hesitated over marriage, dreading that the oppression in marriage would drag her down, and that she would not be able to forgive herself if she walked into this apparent trap while her feminist awareness warned of all its pitfalls. She then concluded:

Finally, I declare that I have the courage and resolution to live independently. I oppose the marital system. […]. Someday, women may realize that they do not have to or should not enter marriage. (22 October 2021)

Some feminists in the community also shared experiences of successfully persuading their parents to accept the anti-marriage idea and dealing with parent-child relationship struggles through separation. To cope with the serious, damaging interruptions that occur in their personal lives, some feminists choose to move out and lessen their material and emotional dependency on their families, an increasing attitude formed among many self-identified feminists. These strategies boost confidence in self-determination and lead to empowerment.

My mother thinks I am selfish, radical, and mad. I was angry and fought her, but later, what? I live my own life. I have my own mind. My values are determined by myself. (13 July 2021)

In conclusion, when feminist members encounter gender discrimination in their relationships with family members, instead of feeling anger toward families in the first place, many confess their experiences of pain, grievance, and bewilderment in their reflections on such situations. The feminists’ anti-marriage stance, which originates from righteous anger toward injustice against women embedded within the marriage system and embodied in conventions in Chinese society, cannot be understood by family members. The disagreement caused many parents to accuse their daughters of being ‘radical’ and ‘mad,’ which challenges the feminist identity. Thus, successfully coping with these emotional conflicts means consolidating a feminist identity. The feminist identity is also debated regarding the anti-marriage stance of this online community. Some feminists showed resentment toward members who were reluctant to oppose marriage as their ‘feminist consciousness is insufficient’ and avoided further involvement that may cause emotional draining (Hercus, 1999). Others, on the contrary, encouraged women to empower themselves through the anti-marriage stance by choice, which may strengthen the feminist identity.

Conclusion

This study examined the ambivalent effects of anger, given its importance in social movements, building on the literature on emotions and social movements. Based on a Chinese online feminist group in which members show refusal toward patriarchal marriage and family, this paper explored (1) the subversive feature when anger is directed to the structure and opponents and (2) anger misaligned with other emotions in that its subversive power is being suppressed.

The findings revealed that when anger is generated from a sense of injustice, it shows the subversive power to oppose the structure as a source of injustice and helps feminists confront scorn without fear. First, feminists’ righteous anger toward the inequity embedded in the marriage system created a sense of urgency to initiate social change. This form of discourse presents an alternative representation of marriage and family that differs from Chinese mainstream social values putting heterosexual marriage and family on a pedestal and summons women to think about what they should do when facing gender injustice and to act upon their feminist beliefs. Second, righteous anger renders feminists confident about confronting misogynistic discourses that attempt to shame women who refuse marriage. Given the severe backlash on Chinese social media, the women-only online space allows feminists to deliberate on their concerns without men, which is important for the movement’s sustainment. When righteous anger, misandry, and humor align with each other, feminist beliefs are reinforced.

The findings also revealed that when feminists deal with gender discrimination in affective relationships, frustration, grievance, and pain come to the forefront as anger is suppressed to cope with emotional conflicts. First, gender discrimination behaviors within the family challenge feminist identities and result in emotional conflicts between affective ties and suppressed anger, leading to pain, frustration, and grievances. When Chinese feminists cope with emotional conflicts, attaching feminist identities to the anti-marriage stance helps solidify their identities as feminists and the determination to act accordingly. Second, resignation occurs when feminists avoid engaging in in-group arguments that may cause emotional drain. Some feminists in the group contended that even women who hesitate about marriage are not qualified to identify as feminists because their feminist consciousness is insufficient, and there is no possibility of building solidarity with them. However, instead of using an anti-marriage stance as a criterion to judge whether feminists are qualified, other feminists reaffirmed their feminist identity by considering the anti-marriage stance as a courageous practice of living outside mainstream social values and rediscovering one’s inner power. The discourse on empowerment increases women’s confidence and solidifies their feminist identities.

However, this study has some limitations. The first is the method used for data collection to explore the ambivalent effects of anger. Numerous studies on emotions within social movements have indicated that participant observation and interviews are effective and commonly used to explore activists’ emotions (for example, Guenther, 2009; Norgaard, 2006). These approaches offer more detailed and consistent narratives, allowing researchers to understand how emotions are constructed during protests, daily activities, and their impact on movement outcomes. However, the author lacked direct access to the participants in this online group because of the platform’s anonymous features; therefore, the analysis was limited to looking into the ambivalent effects of anger when anger and other emotions were evoked and expressed based on feminists’ written personal narratives posted in this community. Conversely, anonymity created a free space where participants could reflect on their thoughts, experiences, and emotions with authenticity, thus opening a window for researchers to immerse themselves in these narratives and interpret the emotions in the ways that feminist members intended to deliver. The second limitation concerns the sample size. Since many online feminist communities had been censored on Douban before data collection, it became impossible to sample online groups representing other strands of feminist stances concerning their opinions on marriage in contemporary China, while they could embody different ways of expressing anger. Therefore, the findings cannot be generalized to the Chinese online feminist movement because they include different, even competing, ideas. Apart from these limitations, this study contributes to deepening the understanding of the ambivalent effects of anger in the online feminist movement in China by focusing on situations where anger emerges as subversive or suppressed and the distinct emotional consequences experienced by participants. Further research should include interviews with identifiable online feminist activists who advocate an anti-marriage stance. This would enable an exploration of the outcomes of various types of emotions experienced by participants. Additionally, it would shed light on the emotional strategies feminists employ to navigate conflicting emotions within their family and intimate relationships in their daily lives. Furthermore, exploring other contrasting feminist strands and their emotions on the same platform or across different ones would advance the dialogue within the literature on social movements, social media, and emotion.

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Kyoko Tominaga, Kazuhiro Terashita, Kasumi Ito, Shanshan Ouyang, the editor and two anonymous reviewers at Social Movement Studies for their insightful comments and constructive suggestions on previous versions of this paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Japan Science and Technology Agency [JST SPRING, Grant Number JPMJSP2101].

Notes on contributors

Yushuang Yang

Yushuang Yang is a Ph.D. candidate at Graduate School of Sociology, Ritsumeikan University, Japan. Her research interests include social movement theories, emotion and social movements, online activism, and feminist movements. She is working on her dissertation with a tentative title, ‘Emotion Cultures in Digitally Networked Social Movements: How Solidarity is Formed and Impeded in Chinese Online Feminisms.’