Banned practice of foot binding blighting China's oldest women | ITV News

Overview of the ITV News Report

The ITV News report presents first-hand accounts from elderly women in China who experienced foot binding, a practice that began around the 10th century and continued into the 1950s. The segment focuses on the physical and lifelong consequences of the procedure.

It describes how young girls’ feet were forcefully deformed to achieve the “ideal” beauty standard—commonly referred to as the “single point” shape. This involved breaking the toes (except the big toe) and tightly wrapping them under the sole.

First-Person Account (91-year-old Woman)

A 91-year-old woman explains that she was forced to undergo foot binding daily. She states that refusing the practice could result in beatings from her parents.

She also describes the lasting effects, including:

• Numbness and severe loss of feeling in her feet
• Her arch and toes being broken and damaged

Social Pressure and Emotional Impact

The report notes that women were also conditioned to believe that:

• Small feet were necessary to secure marriage
• Girls with bound feet were promised better prospects
• Those without bound feet were told they would never marry

The emotional toll is emphasized as well. The woman recalls crying during and after the process and says she remains upset by the memory even now.

Historical Context

The segment explains that foot binding was initially associated with refinement and beauty, often linked with “lotus” symbolism. Over time, the practice spread widely across Chinese society, especially in rural areas.

By the beginning of the 19th century, it was reported that most women had bound feet.

Decline and Legacy

The report concludes that foot binding persisted until government enforcement in the 1950s, when it was banned as a “backward” practice. It also notes that very few women are still alive today to share their experiences.

Presenters / Contributors (As Mentioned in Subtitles)

• Georgia
• Debbie (Eduard)
• ITV News correspondent/reporter(s) (not fully identifiable from the subtitles)
• “Leo” (name appears in subtitles, but context is unclear)