China Local News

“Brainless” Local Policy to Boost Birthrates: Bonus Points for Kids from Bigger Families

Having a second or third baby? Zhezhou County will give you bonus points for that.

Published

2 years ago

March 25, 2023

As Chinese experts and local authorities across the country are thinking of new ways to encourage couples to have more children in light of China’s dropping birth rates, this latest measure announced by Shanxi’s Zhezhou County has sparked controversy.

Dropping birth rates have been a major concern for Chinese authorities for years now, and in light of the recent Two Sessions and its aftermath, it has become a bigger topic of discussion on Chinese social media.

To encourage young people to marry and have more children, various initiatives have been suggested or implemented, with a particular focus on the role education plays in this matter.

One recent proposal from an expert has been to shorten the education period as a means to promote China’s birth rates. This includes the idea of eliminating the middle school entrance exam to reduce two years of elementary and middle school education to allow young people to start their post-graduate life at an earlier age.

Earlier this month, another measure that also focuses on education in the context of boosting birth rates sparked heated debates on Weibo.

The measure was introduced by the local government of Zezhou County, a county in the southeast of Shanxi province. The idea entails that families of two children or more will receive benefits in education; their second or third child would get ten additional points in their senior high school exams (zhongkao 中考).

The related hashtag, titled “Second or Third Children from Shanxi’s Zezhou County Will Receive an Additional 10 points in the Senior High School Entrance Exam” (#山西泽州二三孩中考将加10分#) received over 120 million views in less than two days.

On Chinese social media, most netizens responded to this proposed measure with indignation, arguing that it violates the basic principle of exam equality.

In response, one popular legal blogger on Weibo called ‘Lawyer Zhuang Zhiming’ (@庄志明律师) published an article titled: “Shanxi’s Zezhou County Giving Families with Two/Three Kids Extra Zhongkao Points – How Did Such a Brainless Policy Come About?” (“山西泽州二、三孩家庭中考加分，如此弱智政策是怎么出台的?”)

In the article, the author vehemently criticized the policy, stating that it goes against the basic spirit of education equality and describing it as a “devilish measure against the times” (“逆时代的魔鬼之操作”).

In addition to being unfair to one-child families, the author argues that the policy also treats the first child of two or three children families unequally since they cannot receive the extra bonus points while their younger siblings can.

Many users on Weibo also agree with this argument, stating that the policy creates a situation where the first-born child is “inherently placed at a disadvantage,” “starting one step behind the others.”

The cover of the official notice from the Zezhou county government regarding their measurements for promoting the balanced development of population. Image from Sina Weibo’s post.

Other netizens also criticized this policy, viewing it as an extreme family planning policy. One Weibo post under the hashtag suggests that this policy is similar to measures taken during the one-child policy era and creates inequality to compel people to realize the state’s birth rate goals.

Another Weibo user stated: “When we were young, our parents were fined for having multiple children, while we watched families with one child or two daughters receive bonus points. Now that we’ve grown up and can’t afford to have more children, we’re watching those with two or three children receive bonus points.”

Some also expressed anger and frustration in the comments sections, saying these kinds of policies make them feel pressured to have children and actually makes them feel like not having kids altogether.

“Just don’t have babies at all,” one person wrote, while another comment said: “If we would treat humans as actual humans, we could avoid strange occurrences like this.”

In mid-March, Sina News reported that the local government responded that the policy is not active yet and is being implemented in “one or two years.”

In addition to the extra points for the senior high school entrance exam, the local authorities have come up with other measures that benefit families with two or three children, including exemption from outpatient registration fees in the county’s public hospitals, an additional sixty days of maternity leave for the third child, 50% off (second child) or no fees (third child) for county public kindergartens, and free after-school childcare services.

Although these local initiatives have drawn a lot of criticism, some people also applaud them.

Phoenix Weekly‘s Weibo account posted about all the measures taken by the local government, and one person replied: “This is the most effective policy I have seen so far. If Shanghai were to implement such measures, the birth rate would increase very quickly.”

Other netizens also suggested that the policy may not be as harmful as some claim it is. In response to concerns about the policy’s impact on education equality, some point out that the extra points are only added if students take the zhongkao for high schools located within the county. They, therefore, suggest the measure could actually decrease competition for urban schools, since there will be no bonus points for those entrance exams.

Another Weibo user trivialized the policy’s impact by suggesting that “there are no good high schools in the county, so [the policy] won’t have much of an influence [on education equality] at all.”

While the policy’s scope is limited to the county level and may not significantly affect the lives of most individuals, most commenters in these online discussions still see it as a challenge to the fundamental values of equality, merit-based education, and individual autonomy over family planning.

Many people doubt the effectiveness of manipulating the education system to boost birth rates and argue that addressing the broader socio-economic context is the only viable solution: “The government’s priority should be to ensure high-quality basic services for children and to maintain these standards. When people feel happy, they may be more willing to have children. Improving the quality of child-rearing and education is more crucial than increasing the quantity of children.”

By Zilan Qian

Get the story behind the hashtag. Subscribe to What’s on Weibo here to receive our newsletter and get access to our latest articles. Follow us on Twitter here.

Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us. First-time commenters, please be patient – we will have to manually approve your comment before it appears.

Up Next

Slip of the Tongue: Biden Accidentally Says He “Applauds China”

Don't Miss

What’s Cooking? This Is What Putin and Xi Had for Dinner in Moscow

Zilan Qian

Zilan Qian is a China-born undergraduate student at Barnard College majoring in Anthropology. She is interested in exploring different cultural phenomena, loves people-watching, and likes loitering in supermarkets and museums.

Click to comment

China Local News

The Liaoyang Restaurant Fire That Killed 22 People

Published

2 months ago

April 29, 2025

Manya Koetse

🔥 Quick Take: Trending in China – Week 18
This is a brief update from our curated roundup of what’s trending in China this week. A version of this story also appears in the Weibo Watch newsletter. Subscribe to stay in the loop.

An enormous fire that happened at a restaurant in Liaoning’s Liaoyang on the afternoon of April 29 (see video) has gone top trending on Chinese social media, mainly due to the fact that it caused so many fatalities.

By 7pm, Chinese official media reported that the fire, which happened at 12:25 in the city’s Baita district, had killed 22 people. Three people were injured.

The fire started on the second floor of the restaurant Sanli Chuniang (三里厨娘/Sanli Chef’s Daughter) on Minzhu Road (民主路) and quickly spread throughout the entire two-story brick-concrete structure, which covers an area of about 260 square meters. The windy weather also played a part in how quickly the fire spread. The fire broke out around lunchtime, when there were many customers.

The restaurant before and after the fire.

Some sources on Xiaohongshu report that, according to witnesses, toxic smoke filled the entire building in less than five minutes. The thick smoke, small spaces inside the two-story building, and limited escape routes — some of which were allegedly blocked — all contributed to the high number of fatalities. Some victims were reportedly just ten meters away from the exit, yet still failed to escape.

According to Caixin, the restaurant’s second floor had several private rooms without windows.

To make matters worse, some nearby vehicles were not moved in time, hindering the rescue operations.

Sanli Chuniang was a locally popular restaurant serving various Chinese dishes, snacks, and dumplings. It was in business since 2016.

On social media, many commenters are expressing shock and sadness over the deadly fire. They also want answers into why there seemed to have been little to no fire safety precautions at the establishment.

The last time a restaurant fire with many fatalities made major headlines in China was in 2023, when a gas explosion inside a BBQ restaurant in Yinchuan resulted in 31 deaths. Nine people, including the restaurant owner, were later arrested in connection with the fire and the lack of safety precautions.

Some reports on the Liaoyang restaurant fire have now been removed, but it appears that the restaurant had been operating illegally since 2023 and that its fire safety inspections were not up to date.

Guancha reported that while the cause of the fire is still under investigation, the restaurant owner has been taken into custody.

🔄 Update 1: Chinese leader Xi Jinping issued a statement regarding the devastating fire, calling on local authorities to hold those responsible accountable and to properly handle matters related to the victims and console their families.

Premier Li Qiang also emphasized that local authorities across China should screen for fire hazards and strengthen safety measures to prevent such major accidents from occurring.

🔄 Update 2: Preliminary investigations have ruled out arson or gas leakage as the cause of the fire. The specific cause of the incident is still under investigation, focusing on leftover cigarette butts that might have started the fire or possible electrical faults. The restaurant’s furniture and interior materials were highly flammable, and strong winds outside caused the fire to spread quickly and block the exits. This made it difficult for those trapped inside to escape. Most victims died from asphyxiation after inhaling large amounts of toxic smoke in a short time.

As definite results have not yet been issued at the time of writing (May 6), some netizens are wondering: “When can we expect to hear more?”

By Manya Koetse

(follow on X, LinkedIn, or Instagram)

Follow What’s on Weibo on

China Local News

Aftermath of Suzhou Marathon’s “Pissing Gate”

Published

2 months ago

April 24, 2025

Manya Koetse

🔥 Quick Take: Trending in China – Week 17
This is a brief update from our curated roundup of what’s trending in China this week. A version of this story also appears in the Weibo Watch newsletter. Subscribe to stay in the loop.

It has already been over seven weeks since the Suzhou Marathon took place, but it was trending again today in light of a statement that has come out regarding a particular situation.

During the March 2nd Suzhou Marathon, which had over 25,000 participants, images and videos went viral showing how some runners stopped to take a toilet break and urinated against the main sign of the Jiangsu Suzhou Experimental Middle School (江苏省苏州实验中学).

At the time, the Suzhou Marathon soon released an official statement denouncing the “uncivilized” behavior of the runners.

Other images showed that there were portable toilets set up along the route, but even there, there were runners urinating in public.

Portable toilets along the route.

Runner urinating behind the portable toilets.

On April 24, the Chinese Athletics Association (中国田径协会, CAA), the national governing body for athletics in China, issued a statement saying that, according to the association’s disciplinary regulations, ten participants who urinated against the school sign have been banned from participating in any marathon affiliated with the CAA for the next three years, until March 1, 2028.

The Chinese Athletics Association further stated that they have decided to revoke Suzhou Marathon’s eligibility to apply for event certification in 2026.

Although most online commenters agree that the runners should be punished for their behavior, some also note that it seems “unfair” that Suzhou Marathon also cannot apply for organizing its 2026 marathon:

💬 “(..) because of the uncivilized behavior of just 10 people, Suzhou Marathon’s eligibility to apply for certification from the Chinese Athletics Association in 2026 was directly cancelled. Isn’t this kind of penalty a bit unfair to Suzhou? After all, just 20 meters away from where those people were peeing, there were many portable toilets set up.”

Just around the corner from where the runners urinated in public, there were plenty of portable toilets set up.

Where they peed against the wall, and the toilets nearby.

The punishment for the Suzhou Marathon seems to be a classic case of “killing the chicken to scare the monkey” (杀鸡儆猴): a drastic measure that sends a clear message to other marathons. Not only should they provide plenty of portable toilets, but they must also enforce measures or assign staff to ensure that another “pissing gate” doesn’t happen in the future.

By Manya Koetse with contributions by Miranda Barnes

(follow on X, LinkedIn, or Instagram)

Follow What’s on Weibo on