Liang Ch’i-ch’ao was another noted political reformer who wrote persuasively in favor of the abolition of footbinding. He approached the problem from a broader perspective and thought in terms of elevating the social status of women. His essays evoked a general response and may have influenced those who felt antipathy to ideas they believed were imported from abroad. Here is an example of Liang’s argumentation taken from the Chinese press:
The eyes, ears, nose, hands, and feet come from Heaven and our parents. If one is incomplete or mutilated, we call this being lamed and say that Heaven has harmed the people. The ancient kings, in determining punishments, cut off noses, ears, and legs in order to punish evildoers and awe others into submission. Benevolent persons sometimes criticized these sovereigns for having damaged Heaven by injuring mankind in this way.
Men and women share equally. Heaven gives them life and parents give them love, treating them equally. . . . But the difference between strong and weak is most clearly marked in the difference between man and woman. Over the vast universe and throughout the ages, political edification from the sagely and virtuous was diffused like the vast seas, but not a word was said or a deed committed for the sake of woman. Women were treated in one of two ways: they either fulfilled a series of duties or served as playthings. They were reared like horses or dogs to satisfy the first need and adorned like flowers or birds to satisfy the second. These two methods of oppression gave rise to three types of punishment. In Africa and India they pressed a stone against a woman’s head to make it level, a punishment like our tattooing; in Europe they wanted the woman to have a slender waist, and to accomplish this they punished her by pressing wood against her waist; in China the woman had to have her feet bound, a punishment like cutting off the lower legs. These three punishments produced imperfect women throughout the world. I don’t know when bound feet started, but the originator must have been a corrupt prince, an immoral ruler, a robber of the people, or a despicable husband.
Alas! Good things in the world are done only with the greatest caution and hesitation, but evil things are transmitted very easily from one to another. These cruel, despicable, and frightening things spread their poisons everywhere and for countless ages! Parents force their daughters [into footbinding], while others make this the basis for selecting their sons’ brides. And a man esteems his wife for this reason. The child is punished this way when it has still not lost its first set of teeth. Its bones are broken and its flesh deteriorates, with bloody pus scattered about and injury widespread. Parents ignore its sighs, do not pity its weeping, are cold to its entreaties, and deaf to its screams. The child cannot get up for several months, even with the aid of a cane; a year later, she can only get about by being carried in a sedan chair.
Poems were used for propaganda purposes with perhaps even greater effect than the essays, for they were easy to understand and appealed to the emotions rather than the intellect. Poems in praise of the golden lotus had been legion in the days of its unquestioned popularity, but as the abolitionists gained momentum the tiny foot came under increasing poetic attack. Liang Ch’i-ch’ao’s contemporary Lin Ch’in-nan wrote three poetic denunciations of footbinding under the title of “Tiny-Foot Lady.” The poems, which resorted to practical arguments rather than theoretical or abstract ones, are translated below: