Talk:Hakka culture

Footbinding

It is claimed in the article that footbinding was once common in China, and the Hakka women did not participatge. Can we actually have a factually verified source to say what is meant by "common"; for example was it >50% of the population, 10%, 5%, 1%, <1% or what? One could equality say that Punk rockers with glued up green hair was once common sight in the USA and the UK, but I would say that <1% of the total population of these countries were involved. I would say that from all available evidence that most women of China in her history from any of its sub-groups were not footbounded. 86.184.52.111 (talk) 13:23, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry but that's not the case. Getting an estimate on how many women in China's feet were bound isn't possible given that no statistics were kept on it at the time. However, if you read books by people or about people who lived among the northern Chinese where it was practiced you get a pretty good picture of what was going on. For example, British missionary Gladys Aylward whose experience among the northern Chinese is documented in "The Small Woman" was a foot binding inspector hired by the local mandarin to put a stop to the practice. The mandarin believed in hiring her that as an outsider with no stake in village politics or custom she'd be more likely to get the job done. Several of the girls in her orphanage had feet that had been bound and never fully recovered their ability to walk without handicap. Foot binding was considered enough of a social priority that when the Communists came to power the practice was outlawed. And your comparing foot binding to a hair style fad is completely disingenuous. A change in hair color does not leave you with a permanent disability like foot binding did. I suggest YOU read up about it and swallow your nationalistic pride. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.138.89.7 (talk) 04:01, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

47.138.89.7|47.138.89.7, what the hell are you talking about, what national pride? The question previously posed was very simple, that is is there a verified statistic about the percentage of women foot-binded. As you admit, clearly the source you quoted did not record the proportion of women foot-binded. It is clear that you are just a racist, and cannot approach studying a subject objectively and with a clear mind. 86.182.43.142 (talk) 13:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the posted statement above that foot-binding stats are next to non-existent and therefore one has to go on anecdotal evidence which indicates that foot-binding was widespread and very common. That's just a fact. The demand for a statistic is unnecessary since foot-binding was an obvious well-documented problem and was of concern to both the Nationalist and Communist governments of China. That the response above contains foul language ("what the hell are you talking about") also indicates that Wikipedia doesn't police it's talk pages very well. In addition whomever posted the above uses the term "racist" without understanding the meaning of the word. It would appear that the accusation of "racist" is actually being confused with "I don't like what you said". The maturity level is questionable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.248.13.32 (talk) 17:59, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Completely biased opinion

This statement,

"They (Hakka people) are much stronger, more independent, and more courageous than most Chinese."

....is nothing but someone's half-baked opinion. If Wikipedia wants to be seen as a factual source of referenced material then the editors need to EDIT OUT idiot statements like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.138.89.7 (talk) 04:05, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

47.138.89.7|47.138.89.7 clearly has no idea what he/she is talking about. Such traits were recorded by the early British colonial rulers of Hong Kong, known to anyone who study Hakka-studies in Hong Kong, and is very common knowledge but clearly not known to 47.138.89.7|47.138.89.7 86.182.43.142 (talk) 13:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

The British colonists were not an unbiased and scholarly source of information. If this article uses such sources to make claims about Hakka culture then the article is flawed. In addition to state that one ethnic group was "braver and stronger" than another is just an opinion and a childish one at that. Opinion has no place in a encyclopedia which is what Wikipidea claims to be. Stick to the facts and do not make statements that are clearly biased if you want anyone to believe what your article states. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.248.13.32 (talk) 13:45, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Merge: Hakka people

I cant find any other wiki article about peoples that have a seperate page for their culture. I suggest merging this page with Hakka people. Also, probably remove the obviously prejudiced material about the Hakka being better than other chinese people because some british guy said so. There's nothing wrong with liking a group, even your own, but that doesnt mean its better than other groups 174.91.152.200 (talk) 17:12, 12 November 2020 (UTC)