Gender and Education Vol. 18, No. 5, September 2006, pp.

491505

Boys as only-children and girls as onlychildrenparental gendered expectations of the only-child in the nuclear Chinese family in present-day China
Fengshu Liu*
Fengshul2002@yahoo.com FengshuLiu 0 500000September 18 2006 Originaland Education 0954-0253 Francis Ltd Gender&Article 2006 10.1080//09540250600881626 CGEE_A_188088.sgm Taylor and (print)/1360-0516 (online) Francis

Studies on the effect of only-child status on girls education indicate that the only-child policy has had an unintended consequence of engendering a child-centered culture with a strong belief and shared interest among the urban community in educating the only-child regardless of the childs sex. As the distribution of education by sex is frequently argued to be a key determinant for gender inequality, this finding seems to carry an unquestioned message that gender equality has been largely achieved for the only-child generation. So far, however, few studies have examined parental gender-specific expectations for their only children as an important factor in preparing boys and girls for their different school and social experiences. Based on data collected through semi-structured interviews with 20 families in north China, this paper explores parental gender-specific expectations of their only-children. Parents SES is also considered in order to see how class may interact with gender in parents expectations for boys and girls as only-children. The study reveals patterns of differences in parental expectations based on gender, and to a lesser degree, class. The author argues that it would be over-optimistic to believe that only-child status and the equally high academic aspirations parents hold for boys and girls have done away with all the deep-rooted factors against gender equality in Chinese society. Drawing on Bourdieus social theory, the author discusses the implications of the findings and provides suggestions for policy efforts and further research.

Introduction As a result of the one-child-per-couple policy first implemented in 1979, currently over 90% of urban children are only-children in China (Poston & Falbo, 1990). The arrival of the only-child generation, together with the accompanying social-economic
*Postbox 1092, Blindern 0317, Oslo, Norway. Email: Fengshul2002@yahoo.com ISSN 09540253 (print)/ISSN 13600516 (online)/06/05049115 2006 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/09540250600881626

492 F. Liu changes since the late 1970s, has totally altered the context of child socialization in urban China (Davin, 1990). The effect of changing family structure on the socialization and education of the only-child has attracted academic interest worldwide. Recently, there has been a growing interest in examining the effect of only-child status on girls education (Falbo & Polit, 1986; Liu, 2002; Tsui & Rich, 2002). These studies have shown that the only-child policy has had an unintended consequence of engendering a childcentered culture with a strong belief and shared interest among the urban community in educating the only-child regardless of the childs sex. Little difference related to education (in terms of desired educational level and readiness for educational investment) between only-girl and only-boy families has been found. This forms a striking contrast with the Chinese tradition in which parents academic expectations and investments were limited to their sons. As the distribution of education by sex is frequently argued to be a key determinant for gender inequality (Parish & Wills, 1995), this finding seems to carry an unquestioned message that gender equality has been largely achieved for the only-child generation. My interest in examining parental gender-specific expectations for the only-child derives from the concern that high parental educational expectations and readiness to invest in girls as well as boys education alone is not enough in doing away with all the deep-imbedded obstacles against gender equality in Chinese society. Genderspecific expectations have been documented as a most decisive factor in child socialization and hence in preparing boys and girls for their different school and social experiences (Rinehart, 1992). Therefore, unless parental gender-specific expectations are examined vis--vis the observed high parental educational expectations, the abovementioned finding tends to lead to a simplistic and over-optimistic view about gender equality. This is especially true in China, where gender-role stereotypes, which have been documented by many scholars in the west since the 1960s as incompatible with social equality, nor with personal growth and development, have hardly been challenged in the same way. To this end, this paper seeks to understand how the combined effects of the onlychild status, sex of the child and SES (social-economic status) of parents have affected parental gender-specific views and expectations in present-day China. The study draws upon data collected through semi-structured interviews with parents of 20 only-children in Chengde City in north China. The participants were recruited based on the purposive sampling method (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994) with the help of the headmaster and two head teachers at a local primary school, where the children were Grade 4 students. The sample consisted of 10 boys families and 10 girls families. Each of the two groups included five higher SES families, where the parents have received a higher education of at least four years, and five lower SES families, where the parents have achieved a maximum senior middle schooling. I included SES in the analysis mainly out of the consideration that gender and class (and some other social relations such as race and ethnicity) are often interrelated factors in shaping individuals life chances, as has been documented by some researchers (see Bourdieu, 1984, 1996; Seidler, 1994; Merrill, 1999). The intent

Boys and girls as only-children 493 here is to see how parents SES may impact parental gender-specific expectations for the only-child. All the interviews were conducted at the informants homes with both the parents participating. I spent about two hours for each interview and taped the whole interview, which I afterwards transcribed and translated for the purpose of data analysis. Data analysis was guided by the approach known as the constant comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) to identify emerging themes and categories that shed light on the research questions. For ethical reasons, pseudonyms are used in this paper. Theoretical framework It is widely recognized that child socialization based on gender-stereotypes plays a major role in perpetuating gender inequalities in society. Attempting to unpack the process in which gender is reproduced and realized, Bourdieu (2001) has outlined the notion of gendered habitus, which traces masculine domination and hence gender inequality back to socialization in various social settings, such as the family. Bourdieu (1990) defines habitus as a system of durable, transposable dispositions, structured structures predisposed to function as structuring structures (p. 53). Interpreting Bourdieu, Layder notes:
[Habitus] emerges as a result of socialization and our social experience in certain backgrounds and circumstances (class, ethnicity, gender, and so on). Our experience in certain social settings and circumstances or long-term occupation of a position within the social world predisposes us to approach the world with the knowledge and interactional resources that we have acquired in those circumstances. (Layder, 1994, p. 156)

Bourdieu (2001) argues that our sense of gender is socially constructed and produces a gender-differentiated habitus. According to him, the division of the sexes is not only present in the objectified state but also in the embodied statein the habitus of the agent, as systems of schemes of perception, thought and action (Bourdieu, 2001, p. 8). Drawing on Bourdieu, Krais (1993) notes that in the socialization process every agent inevitably acquires a gendered habitus, an identity which has incorporated the existing division of the sexes. Such a division is largely based on gender stereotypes which define who is included in and excluded from a given realm of social life and gives rise to tacit agreement about gender borders (Bourdieu, 1984). Consequently, the relevant individuals come to see themselves as belonging to the particular categories they have been assigned to. They even make a virtue of this affiliation so that the domination by certain individuals or groups goes without being recognized as such (Bourdieu, 1991). Bourdieu (1984; see also Bourdieu & Wacquant, 1992) describes processes like this as symbolic violence, which is:
a gentle violence, imperceptible and invisible even to its victims, exerted for the most part through the purely symbolic channels of communication and cognition (more precisely, misrecognition), recognition, or even feeling. (Bourdieu, 2001, pp. 12)

It works when subjective structuresthe habitusand objective structures (e.g., gender division) are in accord with each other (Krais, 1993).

494 F. Liu Traditional gender stereotypes have proved to be especially harmful for girls and women because they have been employed for female subjugation in society. Nevertheless, Bourdieu recognizes that they also form a trap for boys and men. While the latter may enjoy the power that masculine domination permits them, they can wield this power only through the effort that every man has to make to rise to his own childhood conception of manhood and through the tension and contention imposed on every man by the duty to assert his manliness in all circumstances (2001, p. 50). Bourdieus notion of the gendered habitus shows that gender is largely the result of socialization rather than a natural feature, as the biological determinists (see Freud, 1964; Wilson, 1978) would claim. This finds empirical support in studies conducted in various socialcultural settings which have demonstrated that there are no innate differences between boys and girls in terms of intelligence and dispositions for achievement among other things, and that differences are found among individuals rather than between girls and boys (Bem, 1983; Jacklin & Baker, 1993; Epstein et al., 1998; Kenway & Willis, 1998; Collins et al., 2000). Therefore, socializing individuals along a certain line based on gendered normative assumptions may constrain them from developing their individual potential. Moreover, these assumptions, embedded in societys signs and discourse, are often at odds with our lived experiences (KeiferBoyd, 2003). Issues relating to gender are complex and multifaceted and thus call for multiple perspectives to gain a more comprehensive and deeper understanding. As one of such perspectives, Bourdieus theory on gender construction as reviewed above is particularly useful in explaining the complex social and psychological processes involved in the development of gendered subjectivities. Therefore, it can help us to understand the implications of parental gender-specific expectations for the emerging gender identities of the children in this study. In China, strong gender-specific expectations of women and men are traditionally rooted in Confucianism. Gender stereotypes are largely manifested in such notions as Men are born superior to women, A woman without talent is a virtuous one, A man is assessed by his talent and achievement and a woman by her appearance, The role of a woman is a virtuous wife and nice mother, and so on (see Croll, 1995; Guo, 2000; Lin, 2000; Yao et al., 2002). This paper examines to what extent parental gender-specific views and expectations have changed within the context of changing social circumstances and family structure. With the argument that people across classes may experience gender differently (Bourdieu, 1984), the Bourdieuan perspective can also sheds light on how parents social-economic status may interact with gender in their expectations for their children. It is worth noting that Bourdieu has been criticized for a structural bias (see Jenkins, 1996). However, applying a Bourdieuan perspective to an exploration of the implications of parental gendered expectations for their children does not necessarily suggest a deterministic view. Rather, it is to recognize that parental expectations, as an important element in child socialization, do have a major impact to make on the subjects subjectivity and hence on the evolving individual identity.

Boys and girls as only-children 495 Parental gender-specific expectations for their only-children What should a child be like as a boy and as a girl in the parents view and what genderspecific ideals do the parents have for their children? I asked all the participants these questions, no matter whether they had a son or a daughter. A pattern of differences based on gender thus emerged.

When a child behaves in the wrong way Inequalities caused by gender stereotypes have been repeatedly documented as incongruent with social development in contemporary society and thus they are becoming increasingly unacceptable (Spitz & Huber, 1980). However, research shows that parents, peers, teachers among other people, continue to hold and reinforce gender stereotypes in many cases (Sadker & Sadker, 1986, 1994; Eccles, 1989; Delamont, 1990; Reichert & Kuriloff, 2004; VanLeuvan, 2004). One of the skater girls Kelly et al. (2004) studied reported her mother had a big problem with the fact that she preferred more androgynous, baggy clothes to dresses and skirts. Some other researchers find that parents may have stereotypic views about different domains for girls and boys and hence, different educational and career expectations for them (Casserly, 1980; Eccles & Jacobs, 1986; Vetter, 1996). Still other research indicates that parentchild interactions and parental expectations may promote sexrole stereotypes by encouraging boys to explore, take risks, and develop independence, whereas girls are expected to engage in safe, stationary activities (Brock-Utne, 1991; Coltrane, 1997). The gender-specific expectations held by the participants in this study resonate strongly with (and, perhaps, go beyond) the dominant stereotypes associated with being a girl and a boy as documented in many studies such as cited here. All the parents wanted to make sure that boys turn out masculine and most of them deem it important that girls turn out feminine. According to them it must be rectified if a child behaves in the wrong way. It was a view shared by most of the parents that a girl should be gentle and soft as a typical oriental female person (dongfang nxing) should be, as they put it. For example, Kaiges (a boy from a lower SES family) mother expressed her passion for gentle girls by saying, I love gentle and quiet girls. How sweet they are, clinging to their adults! Although some parents indicated it is good for a girl to be lively, they immediately added that it is bad for her to be too unrestrained. Some of the girls had caused their parents to complain that they were too active and not at all like a girl. With the stereotypes in mind, the parents indicated that some subjects and occupations suit girls while others suit boys. Liuweis (a girl from a higher SES family) parents indicated that they would not like their daughter to major in science because girls doing science, as they observed, tend to be masculine and dull in taste. Yangchangs (a boy from a higher SES family) parents spoke for many of the participants here:

496 F. Liu
Mother: In terms of occupation for a girl, it ought to be something steady and peaceful, decent and clean, and not very challenging and risky. I hope my son will go out as far as he likes to explore the wide world as much as he likes. But with a girl, I would not have held such high expectations. The most important thing for a girl is to be steady and safe. Medicinal work and teaching are not only noble, but also steady. Therefore, I think they suit girls. Secretarial work at big companies and artistic work, such as costume designing, garden designing and apartment decoration, are also nice occupations for women. Anyway, a girls life course is supposed to be smooth and easy.

Father:

In line with research that shows that boys face narrower standards of what is acceptable in terms of characteristic sex-role behaviors (Hetherington & Parke, 1986), this study reveals that gender-specific qualities were even more strictly expected of boys. All the parents maintained that a boy is supposed to possess the character of a man and a man is expected to accomplish great achievements (Zuodashi). Typical feminine characteristics, to borrow their words, such as being gentle, considerate, sentimental, introvert and shy, are not desirable in a boy. According to the participants, they not only cause disgust but also, still worse, will impede a boys development because these features tend to make one fix the mind on trifling things. A majority of the boys in this study had caused their parents to worry because they were too introvert and considerate as boys. Chenyangs parents, a higher SES couple, showed much concern about their son:
Father: Our child is a boy, but somehow he is like a girl, bashful in front of people. He is worried when his parents have not had dinner in time He must be rectified. We often urge him to go out and mix with other boys who run everywhere and shout and play in a crazy way. But he seldom plays in the typical boyish way. As a boy, you are to explore the world in the future. If you are too shy, it is not easy for you to blaze your way in society. His father has bought a football for him and we will ask him to play it regularly from next week on.

Mother:

Lijings (a girl from a higher SES family) father, uttered his lamentation in a most passionate way:
It is hard to make real men (nanzihan) nowadays because the environment for boys is too bad. From kindergarten, through primary school, to middle school, most teachers are women. Boys are surrounded by womanishness (nurenqi). Therefore, it is hard for them to grow into men in the true sense of the word. It is a pity, a great pity that Chinese men will lose their manliness (nanziqi)!

In the opinion of most of these parents, the most suitable subjects or occupations for boys include sciences, engineering, construction, computer, politics, military affairs, management and so on. I would not have asked my child to learn the piano or dancing if I had a son, said several of the girls mothers. These things are too soft for boys. If I had a boy instead of a girl, I would have him trained in the army for at least three years, before he takes up any other profession, said Zhanglis (a girl from a higher SES family) mother determinedly.

Boys and girls as only-children 497 Parental views of boys and girls in terms of IQ Another finding related to gender stereotypes indicates that the Confucian postulation that males are superior to females is still alive in some of the parents minds. This can be demonstrated, among other things, through the fact that some of the parents believed that boys are higher in IQ (Zhi Shang) than girls without giving sufficiently convincing support for their argument. Parents adhering to such a notion were found within both the higher SES and lower SES groups and in general it seems that SES has not made much difference in this respect, as can be seen from the following extracts of the interviews. Those parents who believed in the gender differences in intelligence struck me as very confident while delivering their opinions. Here is what I heard from Lixues (girl) parents, a lower SES couple:
Mother: Father: I think boys are higher in IQ than girls because most of the children I know who have entered university are boys. That is true. Boys are after all cleverer than girls. You see, in this neighborhood no girl has succeeded in entering university yet.

This couple said they wished that their only daughter could break the record by becoming the first girl to enter university in their neighborhood. However, they mentioned several times that the girl was slow and so they could not over-expect her. In the following, Yangchangs (boy) mother, a college teacher, made a somewhat self-contradictory comment:
I do not mean boys are higher in IQ than girls. But there IS a difference. As I observe, girls are better at memorizing things, but worse at observing and analyzing things. This is true even at the college level. Among the students I teach, girls usually have shallower opinions than boys in class discussion. Boys show more insight.

Her husband, a restaurant manager, seemed rather bored with the topic, which to him should not be an issue at all because in his opinion it has a self-evident conclusion:
In terms of IQ, generally speaking, men are unqestionably better. Dont you see on TV? Most billionaires, top leaders, scientists, general managers, and military commanders are men. In yesterdays interview, the only woman sitting in the front row was Wuyi [the then minister of Chinas foreign trade]. It appears that this has to do with social stratification. But more importantly, men have greater capacity to control a situation. They have the type of thinking for that. Whoever denies this is blind to evidence.

Lijings (girl) parents, another higher SES couple, aired their opinion on this same question:
Mother: Father: Mother: As I observe, boys have a sort of inner potential. Whenever it comes to difficulties, boys are always stronger than girls. Yes. I agree. The potential that can be dug up in a girl is after all less than in a boy. With a boy, parents only need to set broad boundaries for him and let him play heartily. You do not need to worry about him, for naughty boys will turn out to be intelligent. Boys who are not naughty will not accomplish much.

It follows that, according to them, a boys talent will unfold itself as he grows up. However, with a girl, her parents need to cultivate her in a more deliberate way. This

498 F. Liu reflects the attitude some other researchers found among parents and teachers who tend to attribute girls academic success to their hard work and boys to their talent (Yee & Eccles, 1988; Jussim & Eccles, 1992; Siegle & Reis, 1998; Tiedemann, 2000). This couple constantly reminded their daughter: School takes deliberate effort and sacrifice. The mother told me:
As I observe, prettily dressed girls rarely do well academically. They fix their minds on dressing rather than on the subjects. Therefore, I do not allow my daughter to dress herself up until she has entered university. I often tell her, When you have entered university, I will buy the best clothes for you. For the moment, just wear your school suit, my dear Otherwise, she could not have done so well at school.

The female and beauty One of the traditional Chinese double standards for men and women is that a man is assessed by his talent whereas a woman is judged by her appearance (Langcai Nmao). And this notion was largely taken for granted by my participants. Almost all the informants in this study maintained that a females appearance matters, while it does not matter for a male. Here is what I heard from Longlongs (a boy from a lower SES family) parents:
Mother: When I said to my friends during our chatting that my son is not good-looking, they would say, Oh, fussy you! Does it matter for a boy? I also think it is more important for a girl to be good-looking. If I had a girl, I would dress her up and take her to many occasions. It is a great pleasure to hear people say that your daughter is pretty. [Cutting in.] Just as the old saying goes, a male is assessed by his talent and a female by her appearance.

Father:

Most of the parents insisted that whereas it does not matter for a boy, it is important that a girl should learn something about music, chess, calligraphy and painting (the four classical Chinese fine arts) because these cultivate artistic tastes and graceful demeanor in the girl. The girls parents emphasized that it is not to train the girl as a professional artist; rather, it is to beautify the child as well as to develop her person in a more all-round way. They said they admire the Oriental talented females (Cai N) in Chinese history who were both talented in these fine arts and graceful in demeanor. For this ideal, the parents managed to keep their daughters practicing these things to varying extents at the same time as they insist that the girls should learn the so-called main subjects well. They indicated it was not always easy to achieve this goal, as some of the girls might not have been doing it out of their own interest. Zhanglis (a girl from a lower SES family) mother reported having beaten the girl frequently when the child showed reluctance to practice the piano. That the goal for female beauty requires heavy investment is also shown in other ways. For example, some parents told me that a major reason why they must see that their daughters enter university is because they believe a girl without higher education misses the cultivation that is essential for refined taste and manner which are crucial components of female charm. When asked why they think their child should go to

Boys and girls as only-children 499 university, Linglings (a girl from a higher SES family) mother replied unhesitatingly (and echoed by her husband):
For a womans beauty, of course. A womans beauty consists of two parts, inner beauty and outer beauty. What matters most is the inner beauty. The outer beauty is partly given by nature and partly depends on make-ups. A womans youth is too short and it ends as soon as she is 30. But her inner beauty lasts forever. That is why a woman can still be beautiful when she is 80-years-old. The inner beauty is a result of cultivation and education. A girl without higher education misses so much that she can hardly make up for it in other ways. Such a girl can hardly be beautiful. Dont you see women who have had higher education look distinctively different from those who have not?

When asked why a womans looks is that important, my informants would just laugh and say, That is natural, isnt it? Although it appears natural, this norm is actually deeply embedded in the Confucian definitions for proper female conduct according to the so-called three obediences and four virtues (sancong side) (See Croll, 1995; Guo, 2000; Lin, 2000). One of the four virtues is physical charm which requires that the female person must be clean of person and habits and adorn herself with a view to pleasing the opposite sex. While it may be particularly typical of the Confucian culture, this type of double standards based on gender are actually widespread in the world, as has been documented by many researchers (Eder et al., 1995; Kimmel, 2000; Black & Sharma 2001; Kelly et al., 2004). While standards regarding what is considered to be most beautiful change from age to age and vary from culture to culture, beauty itself has remained a standard for evaluating femininity for women (Eder et al., 1995), or in Black and Sharmas (2001) words, for women femininity is a state to be constantly sought (p. 107). While there may be nothing wrong with paying attention to ones appearance per se, it may have great implications for individuals lived experiences once it serves as a form of the division of the sexes, to use Bourdieus (2001, p. 8) expression. For this reason, this cultural focus on female appearance has been criticized by feminists as a major aspect of female oppression which has serious social and psychological consequences for the female (Eder et al., 1995). With this gender expectation internalized, womens self-esteem becomes tied strongly to their physical appearance. Moreover, women who are evaluated primarily on the basis of being objects lose sense of themselves as actors in the world (Eder et al., 1995). A new ideal for bringing up the daughter In striking contrast to the majority of the parents who stuck to gender stereotypes for girls, the higher SES parents of the five girls indicated a new ideal for bringing up their daughters. All the five couples indicated that they would like their daughters to develop some so-called manly characteristics, such as strong will, toughness, boldness, ambitiousness, competitiveness, independence and so forth. Their ideal was to bring up their daughters to have some of the so-called manly qualities but at the same time preserve some typical qualities deemed as desirable in a female, such as gentleness,

500 F. Liu considerateness and beauty. The following conversation between Liuweis parents is a typical opinion among this school of parents.
Mother: Father: I would like her to be like a boyopen-minded, bold, and tough. Less typical of a traditional girl. I agree. The future society will be more and more competitive. It will be harder for girls because the society will still be in favor of males to some extent. So we want her to possess some of a mans character. She can compete better then. [Proudly] We encourage her to argue, and if necessary, fight with boys. No problem. She dares and can do that. We wish she would become a great politician. A girls gentleness and considerateness do not contradict her career as a competent academic female. Gentleness is a girls nature. So, theres no need to worry [Laughing]

Mother:

Linglings mother, whose comment on higher education and a womans beauty we have just heard in the preceding section, had a similar ideal for her daughter:
Men have many strong points that enable them to accomplish great causes. Although it cannot be said that a woman cannot do great things, she needs to possess the same qualities as men in order to do great things. Therefore, we have been raising our daughter according to a boys standards in some respects, hoping her to possess some manly character. As a girl, she tends to have many weak pointsdelicate, narrow-minded and fussy. We encourage her to play with boys. We bought a football for her and she is the only girl who plays football in her school. We take her out to visit different places, meet different people and see different things in order to broaden her horizon. We plan to let her travel alone to Xinjiang by train next summer vacation. If girls stick together among themselves, they cannot develop this kind of spirit.

For these parents, a girl can well major in the same subjects and take up the same occupations as a boy as long as she likes them. Nevertheless, they maintained that in order to be able to do so, the girl must first cultivate a strong mind by overcoming the weak-mindedness of a typical girl, thus linking being strong and weak to males and females respectively. Most of these parents thought their daughters were still too timid and shy. All of them encourage independence and self-reliance in the girl. Wanglins mother scolded her daughter because the child had been too fearful. She complained, Wanglin cries when she sees a worm. However, it should not be mistaken that the higher SES parents cared less about their daughters femininity. It was these parents who struck me as the most vigorous in emphasizing that beauty is an important component of their ideal for their daughters. Concluding remarks This study attempts to help to address the limitations of previous research on Chinese only-children, which tends to downplay gender in the analysis of only-children and their families. To this end, it explores parental gendered expectations for their onlychildren. The SES of parents is also considered to see how it may interact with gender in parental expectations for boys and girls. Although the study is exploratory, I did find much evidence of the mediating effects of gender, and to a lesser degree, class,

Boys and girls as only-children 501 in parental expectations for their children, the implications of which can be understood through Bourdieus concept of gendered habitus. Previous studies have revealed that thanks to the child-centered culture typical of the only-child community, parents tend to hold equally high educational expectations for both boys and girls (Liu, 2002; Tsui & Rich, 2002). Nevertheless, the strong gender-stereotypic expectations held by the parents in this study shows that one would be over-optimistic to believe that only-child status has totally erased all the deep-rooted gender-specific expectations based on the division of the sexes. When it comes to parental views and ideals for their children, all the interviewees thought it is imperative that boys turn out masculine and most of them believed it is important that girls turn out feminine. Unaware of the constraints such expectations may have on their childrens full development, these parents contradicted themselves in their best wishes for their children when they wanted their children to have the highest education possible and meanwhile develop according to gender stereotypes. Just as the only-child status has failed to eliminate the traditional views concerning being a boy and a girl, this study shows that social class has not totally transcended gender in mediating parental expectations for their children. At first sight, and compared with the other parents interviewed, the ideal of the higher SES parents to have their daughters develop like boys in some respects as well as cultivate the socalled desirable feminine characteristics sounds like a more gender-neutral approach to child socialization. However, at a closer look, their expectations have not gone beyond the thinking along the same male/female binary that has guided the other parents gender stereotypic expectations for their children. In fact, their expectations for their daughters have extended to incorporate the male standards, in the form of the so-called manliness (nanziqi), rather than fundamentally changed. The higher SES parents adherence to the gender stereotypes is also evidenced in the fact that they were equally articulate as the other informants in insisting that boys should turn out masculine. Moreover, their emphasis on a womans beauty indicates that they still had different standards for men and women. Therefore, in essence, the higher SES parents approach to bringing up their daughters may be at best just another way the higher SES parents wayto realize femininity, for just as Bourdieu (1984) argues, there are as many ways of realizing femininity as there are classes and class factions. Such a way of fashioning their feminine identities may mean immense pressure on the girls and their parents. Taken altogether, gender specific expectations for girls have been extended rather than fundamentally changed while those for boys remain largely the same as in the past. Whereas a male is still assessed mainly by his talent, a female is not only still judged by her appearance, but also by her talent. Thus, the daughter is expected to integrate both masculine and feminine characteristics, combine both inner and outer beauty, and perform both expressive and instrumental functions. The strong gender stereotypes held by both higher and lower SES parents in this study have great implications for their childrens evolving identities. Viewed from a Bourdieuan perspective, it can be said that through the gender-specific parental

502 F. Liu expectations and gender-role socialization, a gendered habitus will evolve in time to guide, at an unconscious level, the agents thinking and behavior along the prescribed division between the sexes. This is the very process whereby symbolic violence is done so that masculine domination is enacted and perpetuated. This point has also been emphasized by feminist research which sees gender as a basic organizing principle which profoundly mediates/and shapes the concrete conditions of our lives (Lather, 1991, p. 71). That is, normative assumptions about gender impact how we perceive the world and are perceived by others and they may be at odds with our embodied or desired experiences (Keifer-Boyd, 2003). For example, the belief that boys are more intelligent than girls may influence parents causal attributions about their childrens success and failure, the experiences and opportunities parents provide for the child in various activity domains, and hence the childrens self-concept (Yee & Eccles, 1988; Eccles et al., 1991). Similarly, abundant research has shown that gender stereotypes continue to limit girls interest and participation in career options (see Fleming, 2000; Sadker, 2000). However, just as Bourdieu (2001) argued, whereas gender stereotypes are found particularly detrimental for girls, girls are not the only victims. The so-called femininities and masculinities along which the parents seem to be socializing their children are based on the negation of similarities between men and women and differences among men and among women (Rubin, cited in McCall, 1992). This means that these stereotypical assumptions and expectations can be equally restrictive for boys development to their full potential as individuals (Sadker, 2000). Moreover, in addition to the great pressure incurred by the efforts to prove their masculinity, the masculine identities boys have been striving hard to forge may turn out to be in conflict with the reality of contemporary society, in which conditions in the culture, economy, or politics tend to prevent men from fulfilling the traditional hegemonic masculine role (Comaroff & Comaroff, 2000; Kimmel, 2002). This may have serious socio-psychological consequences for men brought up according to traditional gender-specific expectations. The above analysis points to some potential directions for policy and research practice. First, the lack of parent awareness concerning the in-depth nature of gender stereotypes and their overall influences points to the need for strengthening parent education in China in a way that aims at freeing parents from constraining, stereotypic definitions of gender roles for their children. Parent education should also help parents, especially those who have daughters, to realize how gender-specific expectations may interact with their higher academic aspirations, preventing the latter from eventually being realized. Meanwhile, schools should provide children with courses that incorporate elements of feminist pedagogy so as to provide opportunities for non-sexist thinking and acting from an early age and develop childrens skills for challenging sexist stereotypes and behaviors. In addition, the media as well as schools and communities should take the responsibility to advocate non-sexist thinking and gender-neutral child-raising to society at large. To improve research on Chinese only-children so as to gain a more comprehensive and deeper understanding of them, studies are needed that look into lived school

Boys and girls as only-children 503 experiences (both socially and academically) of only-children from different social groups (by gender and class). For the same purpose, research on the only-child generation should not be limited to the childhood and teenage periods, but should adopt a life-course perspective. Furthermore, to help address the misconception about masculinity and femininity, research informed by critical social theory that aims at social transformation is clearly needed in the Chinese context. References
Bem, S. L. (1983) Gender schema theory and its implications for child development: raising genderaschematic children in a gender-schema society, Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 8, 598616. Black, P. & Sharma, U. (2001) Men are real, women are made up: beauty therapy and the construction of femininity, The Sociological Review, 49, 100116. Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste (London, Routledge). Bourdieu, P. (1990) The logic of practice (Cambridge, Polity Press). (Original work published 1980). Bourdieu, P. (1991) Language and symbolic power (Cambridge, Harvard University Press). (Original work published 1977). Bourdieu, P. (1996) The state nobility (Cambridge, Polity). Bourdieu, P. (2001) Masculine domination (California, Stanford University Press). Bourdieu, P. & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992) The purpose of reflexive sociology (The Chicago Workshop), in: P. Bourdieu & L. J. D. Wacquant (Eds) An invitation to reflexive sociology (Chicago, University of Chicago Press), 61215. Brock-Utne, B. (1991) The raising of a peaceful boy, Peace Education Miniprints, No. 8, January. Casserly, P. L. (1980) Factors affecting female participation in advanced placement programs in mathematics, chemistry, and physics, in: L. Fox, L. Brody & D. Tobin (Eds) Women and the mathematical mystique (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press), 138163. Collins, C., Kenway, J. & McLeod, J. (2000) Gender debates we still have to have, Australian Educational Researcher, 27(3), 3748. Coltrane, S. (1997) Gender and families (Thousand Oaks, CA, Pine Forge). Comaroff, J. & Comaroff, J. L. (2000) Millennial capitalism: first thoughts on a second coming, Public Culture, 12(2), 291343. Croll, E. (1995) Changing identity of Chinese women: rhetoric, experience and self-perception in the twentieth-century China (Hong Kong, Hong Kong University Press). Davin, D. (1990) Only child generation in urban areas of mainland China, Issues and Studies, 26(4), 83105. Delamont, S. (1990) Sex roles and the school (London, Routledge). Eccles, J. (1989) Bringing young women to maths and science, in: M. Crawford & M. Gentry (Eds) Gender and thought: psychological perspectives (New York, Springer-Verlag), 3658. Eccles, J. S. & Jacobs, J. E. (1986) Social forces shape math attitudes and performance, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 11(2), 367380. Eder, D., Evans, C. & Parker, S. (1995) School talk: gender and adolescent culture (New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University Press). Epstein, D., Elwood, J., Hey, V. & Maw, J. (1998) Schoolboy frictions: feminism and failing boys, in: D. Epstein, J. Elwood, V. Hey & J. Maw (Eds) Failing boys? Issues in gender and achievement (Buckingham, Open University Press), 318. Falbo, T. & Polit, D. F. (1986) A quantitative review of the only-child literature: research evidence and theory development, Psychological Bulletin, 100, 176189. Fleming, P. M. (2000) Three decades of education progress (and continuing barriers) for women and girls, Equity and Excellence in Education, 33(1), 7479.

504 F. Liu
Freud, S. (1964) New introductory lectures on psychoanalysis (London, Norton). (Original work published 1933). Guo, F. (2000) The historical track of the Chinese ancient female personality, Chinese Education and Society, 33(6), 614. Hetherington, E. & Parke, R. (1986) Child psychology: a contemporary viewpoint (New York, McGraw-Hill). Jacklin, C. N. & Baker, L. A. (1993) Early gender development, in: S. Oskamp, & M. Costanzo (Eds) Gender issues in contemporary society (Thousand Oaks, Sage), 4158. Jenkins, R. (1996) Pierre Bourdieu (London, Routledge). Jussim, L. & Eccles, J. S. (1992) Teacher expectations II: construction and reflection of student achievement, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 947961. Keifer-Boyd, K. (2003) A pedagogy to expose and critique gendered cultural stereotypes embedded in art interpretations, Studies in Art Education, 44(4), 315334. Kelly, D, M., Pomerantz, S. & Dawn Currie, D. (2005) Skater girlhood and emphasized femininity: you cant land an ollie properly in heels, Gender and Education, 17(3), 229248. Kenway, J. & Willis, S. (1998) Answering back: girls, boys and feminism in schools (London, Routledge). Kimmel, M. S. (2000) The gendered society (Oxford, Oxford University Press). Kimmel, M. S. (2002) Gender, class and terrorism, Chronicle of Higher Education, 48, B1112.a Krais, B. (1993) Gender and symbolic violence: female oppression in the light of Pierre Bourdieus theory of social practice, in: C. Calhoun, E. LiPuma & M. Postone (Eds) Bourdieu: critical perspectives (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press), 156177. Lather, P. (1991) Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy within the postmodern (New York, Routledge). Layder, D. (1994) Understanding social theory (London, Sage). Lin, J. L. (2000) Evolution of the Confucian concept of womens value in recent times, Chinese Education and Society, 33(6), 1523. Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985) Naturalistic enquiry (Beverly Hills, CA, Sage). Liu, F. S. (2002) Parental expectations of the single child in the nuclear Chinese family: boys as single children and girls as single children. Unpublished masters thesis, Institute for Educational Research, University of Oslo. MacCall, L. (1992). Does gender fit? Bourdieu, feminism, and conceptions of social order, Theory and Society, 21(6), 837867. Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. (1994) Beginning qualitative research: a philosophic and practical guide (London, Falmer Press). Merrill, B. (1999) Gender, change and identity: mature women students in universities (Aldershot, Ashgate). Parish, W. L. & Wills, R. J. (1995) Daughters, education, and family budgets: Taiwan experiences, in: T. P. Schultz (Eds) Investment in womens human capital (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press), 239272. Poston, Dubley-L. & Falbo, T. (1990) Academic performance and personality traits of Chinese children: onlies versus others, American Journal of Sociology, 96(2), 43351. Reichert, M. C. & Kuriloff, P. (2004) Boys selves: identity and anxiety in the looking glass of school life, Teachers College Record, 106(3), 544573. Rinehart, G. (1992) Quality education (ASQC Quality Press). Sadker, D. (2000) Gender equity: still knocking at the classroom door, Equity and Excellence in Education, 33(1), 8083. Sadker, D. & Sadker, M. (1986) Sexism in the classroom: From grade school to graduate school. Phi Delta Kappan, 512515. Sadker, M. & Sadker, D. (1994) Failing at fairness: how Americas schools cheat girls (Charles Scribner Sons). Seidler, V. J. (1994) Unreasonable men, masculinity and social theory (London, Routledge).

Boys and girls as only-children 505

Siegle, D. & Reis, S. M. (1998) Gender differences in teacher and student perceptions of gifted students ability and effort, Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 3947. Spitz, G. & Huber, J. (1980) Changing attitudes toward womens non-family roles, Sociology of Work and Occupations, 7, 317335. Tiedemann, J. (2000) Parents gender stereotypes and teachers beliefs as predictors of children s concept of their mathematical ability in elementary school, Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 144151. Tsui, M. & Rich, L. (2002) The only child and educational opportunities for girls in urban China, Gender and Society, 16(1), 7492. VanLeuvan, P. (2004) Young womens science/mathematics career goals from seventh grade to high school graduation, The Journal of Educational Research (Washington, DC), 97(5), 248267. Vetter, B. M. (1996) Myths and realities of womens progress in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering, in: C. S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus & P. M. Rayman (Eds) The equity equation: fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (San Francisco, Jossey-Bass), 2956. Wilson, E. (1978) On human nature (Cambridge, Harvard University Press). Yao, B. R., Han, Q. & Wang, T. (2002) Chinese society and culture (Xian, Shanxi Peoples Publisher). Yee, D. & Eccles, J. S. (1988) Parent perceptions and attributions for childrens math achievement, Sex Roles, 19, 317333.