A hundred years after cutting braids
作者：张致君
编辑：李聪玲 责任编辑：罗志飞 翻译：程铭
从2025年8月5日四川江油特警镇压人民之后，我就想写一篇文章。校园霸凌屡禁不止，单最近两年就听闻数起，更甚者孩子被虐待致死。河北邯郸13岁男孩遭凌虐致死并被埋尸，陕西蒲城职校学生坠楼案，河南许昌初中女生跳楼案等等最后都没有了关注度。尤其蒲城事件，与江油案件中国人民奋起抗争却被中共警察镇压的场面如出一辙。
理应在每次群体事件发生后，作为中国人民要向制度问责时，避免惨剧再次发生。而中共制造的舆论导向却总能把节奏带到“避重就轻”，网络的千军万马让清醒者看着中国人的境地更加可悲。
这次倒也不是高谈阔论谈霸凌和维稳一再发生的体制原罪，而在此次事件中有一股充斥恶意的声音异军突起，在中共统治下尤其显著，以制造“男女对立”疯狂打压“女性“来转移矛盾重点。
而恰恰有一批在辛亥革命时刚剪掉辫子的中国男人，如今就喊着“短发”成了男性性特征。这是我在公共群体事件中如何也想不到的走向。
事情起因简单，一张霸凌事件的AI图。为了能最大可能规避掉中共在中国境内的审核机制，让公共事件不被屏蔽而传播，用漫画还原或做修改现场事件再加标注是最容易过审的。而该引战图片恰恰正是从中国社交媒体下载回传至推特，为保护扩散者，我特意截掉了原出处，甚至损失了原图标注的“公民”。谁料到一群嘴里喊着一定要奸杀女性的人冲到评论区，刻意放大漫画右上图“校园霸凌者”短发问题，批评一张为了让”镇压事件”广为传播的漫画图是刻意制造男女对立。（有兴趣查看详情可以点击推特链接:
（图片来自作者推特截图）
从漫画制作来看，可以明白标注者把“上位”都统一用了“者”来表达，“下位”只是单纯标明身份，无论是普通的“父母”还是“女生”以及被作者截掉的“公民”。而批评者的重点却在漫画里的霸凌者是短发，为什么画成男生，我不禁要问什么时候短发成了男生的“性特征”？中国男人的辫子从辛亥革命才剪掉，留短发也百年了了，有些还是被政府拿着剪刀强制剪的，如今的中国男人倒是留不得长发，女人就不能是短发了。
在中共恶政的原罪下，“下位”不配为“人”，也是漫画所传达出来的涵义。谁会在乎上位者是男是女？政府对校园暴力的不作为、对民众抗议的压制，反倒被模糊乃至遗忘。
无论是霸凌还是镇压的现场视频以及照片足够多，保持正确记忆靠的是视频、照片，也并非是几张为了躲避审核的漫画。就算是男女混淆，真的重要吗？
霸凌本身得不到妥善处理这件事不比男女重要吗？
普通百姓需要跪在中共官员脚下祈求公正这件事不比男女重要吗？
中国公民为维护公义和平抗争却被中共政府暴力镇压这件事不够重要吗？
我从这些如此重要的事情中，看到了“恨意”与“恶意”，是在中共统治下的舆论带来的并且在逐步扩大的矛盾，对女性的恨与恶，这不禁让我背后发凉。
中共从未建国开始就不断制造内部斗争来转移党与人民的矛盾。更甚是执政以后，例如文革中制造的文化阶层冲突，地主与农民冲突等等，数不胜数，如今我似乎又看到新一轮的“内部仇恨”，性别仇恨。
2025年8月10日，一则曝光出来的男生因骚扰女生不成功，连捅十几刀致女生死亡的小新闻，更是印证了涌入作者推下只关注“男女对立”评论者的刻画形象。
现在在中国，一部分男性群体在面对公共悲剧时，不选择批判权力、不关注制度压迫，却执着于性别争斗。这背后折射的，不仅仅再是性别意识的扭曲，更是一种政治冷感与被规训后的集体心理防御机制。
在民主社会，当民众面对警察暴力、制度冷漠、司法不公时，天然会将注意力投向制度改革、权力制衡等议题。但在中国，尤其是在社交媒体平台中，一部分中国男性网民似乎极少质疑“警察为什么镇压群众”“学校是否承担监管责任”等关键问题，反而更关心“是不是女权分子炒作了这件事”“是不是女的打女的就该被嘲笑”。
这种“失焦”是有根源的。是中共执政几十年来，通过一整套话语体系，将“民权”“人权”“民主”“维权”等词语污名化，植入“境外势力”“颜色革命”等负面标签，成功在大众心理中建立起“反权力即危险”的条件反射机制。尤其是男性群体，被灌输为“国家的脊梁”“家庭的支柱”，在体制内外都被鼓励维护现状、服从权威、回避对国家机器的质疑。
换言之，权力对男性的规训方式不是压迫，而是同化。相比之下，女性在就业、教育、婚姻中往往面对更直接的压迫，更容易意识到制度对个体的压迫性，因此许多维权议题中常有女性身影。而那些不愿反思体制的男性，则将这种女性参与视为“挑衅”——于是，女权主义，甚至仅仅是女性，在他们眼中成为“最容易被攻击的替罪羊”。
中共近年来不断强化民族主义宣传，并将“传统性别秩序”作为民族复兴的一部分。宣传“女人别太强”“男孩该阳刚”，否定女性、鼓吹传统父权家庭结构。这种思潮的扩散与性别对立的产生密切相关。
在当下宣传的意识形态中，男性被灌输“主导社会”的集体角色，被寄予“拯救中华民族”的厚望。而当他们在现实生活中遭遇内卷、失业、婚姻恐慌等焦虑时，又无法指向真正压迫他们的体制——因为那被定义为“不可触碰”的红线。于是，他们将愤怒转嫁到“看起来比他们更自由”的女性身上，构建一种“幻想中的剥削链”：
“我们当牛做马，结果女的还要权利？”
这种想法荒谬却具有传播性。它建立了一个被压迫者之间的敌对想象，从而巧妙地替权力系统卸责，让人民互斗，转移矛盾。
不少研究指出，中国近年来“厌女文化”明显抬头。从“母狗”“公主病”“田园女权”到“短发=男”“不化妆=装中性”，性别刻板印象极端化，成为社交网络语言暴力的核心内容。这种厌女并非出自单一仇恨，而是社会结构与文化情绪的复合产物。
婚恋市场失衡下的焦虑外化，男性面对“娶不起老婆”“找不到对象”的现实困境，将其归咎于“女性挑剔”“女权害的”。当社会阶层上升通道受阻，阶层固化下的剥夺感导致性特权的幻觉开始破灭，一些人便需要一个“过得比我好”的靶子作为出气口——在网络上看似独立的女性成了最合适的对象。并且传统观念中，“男人要挣钱养家”， 现实中，这一角色要求往往让底层男性感到失败与羞耻，于是他们更容易借助网络攻击“她们”来掩饰自我否定，实则是自我价值感的崩塌。
回到江油事件，我必须清醒地指出：一名年轻女孩被霸凌，求助无果，是校园与社会共同失职的悲剧；父母正当维权却要跪在权贵脚下；而民众自发和平抗议，却被警察粗暴镇压，是权力与人权的严重冲突。
这三个问题，本应成为社会共同追问的焦点。
但如今，舆论在“女权是不是带节奏”“短发是不是男的”上浪费时间，恰恰说明了极权体制话语操控的成功。只要群众彼此对立、互相撕咬，就不会有人再去问：“学校怎么管教失职了？”“公安凭什么镇压群众？”“一个女孩的命运，谁来负责？”“中国人如何问责中共政府？”
真正该反思的，是一个制度如何制造出如此多不信任、不团结、不理性的受害者。而在这些受害者中，一部分男性选择以“反女权”来逃避直面社会结构问题，这不是偶然，而是制度设计的必然结果。
我不能否认性别议题的重要性，但也必须强调：所有权利的基础，都是“人”的权利——不论性别、不论地区、不论阶层。
在一个权力结构不断制造“次要矛盾”的国家，任何真实关心公正与自由的个体，都应该学会抵抗被舆论操控的手段，重新把焦点投向体制的原罪。
今天一名女性的死亡、一群女性被辱骂，并不是“性别之间的战争”，而是制度冷漠对“普通人”的一场共同压迫。将其简化为“男女之争”，只是在帮助权力遮蔽真正的罪行。
在每一场人命关天的社会事件中，在每一场中国人争取自己应该有的权利中，在民众对抗中共权力的时候，如果一个人最在意的是“男女”，那么他其实早已被权力训练得失去了同情、判断与行动的能力。
而这一点，才是最值得警惕的。
而这样的现状，是中共极权最喜欢看到的现状。
A hundred years after cutting braids
Abstract: The Jiangyou incident exposed the Chinese Communist Party’s system to manipulate public opinion, create gender antagonism and transfer contradictions, and cover up core issues such as campus bullying, rights protection pressure, and institutional indifference, which is alarming.
Author: Zhang Zhijun
Editor: Li Congling Responsible Editor: Luo Zhifei Translator: Ming Cheng
I want to write an article after the Sichuan Jiangyou Special Police suppressed the people on August 5, 2025. Bullying on campus has been repeatedly banned, and several cases have been heard in the past two years alone, and children have been abused to death. A 13-year-old boy in Handan, Hebei Province, was abused to death and his body was buried. The case of a student falling from a vocational school in Pucheng, Shaanxi Province, and the case of a girl jumping from a junior high school in Xuchang, Henan Province, etc. finally fell out of attention. In particular, the Pucheng incident is the same as the scene where the Chinese people rose up to fight in the Jiangyou case but were suppressed by the Chinese Communist Party of China police.
After each group incident, as the Chinese people want to hold the system accountable, we should avoid the tragedy from happening again. However, the public opinion guidance created by the Communist Party of China can always lead the rhythm to “avoid the heavy and light”, and the thousands of troops on the Internet make the sober people look at the situation of the Chinese more pathetic.
This time, it is not the original sin of the system that has repeatedly occurred in bullying and maintaining stability. In this incident, there is a malicious voice, which is especially prominent under the rule of the Communist Party of China, in order to create “male and female antagonism” and crazily suppress “women” to shift the focus of contradictions.
And just a group of Chinese men who had just cut their braids during the 1911 Revolution are now shouting that “short hair” has become a masculine characteristic. This is the unexpected direction in my public group incident.
The cause of the matter is simple, an AI diagram of a bullying incident. In order to avoid the audit mechanism of the Communist Party of China as much as possible, so that public events are not blocked and spread, it is easiest to pass the review by using comics to restore or modify on-site events and mark them. And the war-progging picture was just downloaded from Chinese social media and sent back to Twitter. In order to protect the spreader, I deliberately cut off the original source and even lost the “citizens” of the original icon annotation. Who would have expected that a group of people shouting that they must rape and kill women rushed to the comment area, deliberately enlarging the short-haired problem of “campus bully” in the upper right corner of the cartoon, and criticized that a cartoon picture to spread the “suppression incident” was deliberately creating antagonism between men and women. ( If you are interested in checking the details, you can click the Twitter link: https://x.com/standwithfree/status/1952554527078626480)
(The picture comes from the author’s Twitter screenshot)
Judging from the production of comics, it can be understood that the labeler uses “people” to express the “upper” uniformly, and the “lower” is just a simple identification of identity, whether it is ordinary “parents” or “girls” and “citizens” cut off by the author. The critic’s focus is that the bully in the comics is short hair. Why are they painted as boys? I can’t help but ask when short hair became the “sexual characteristics” of boys? Chinese men’s braids have only been cut off since the 1911 Revolution, and they have had short hair for a hundred years. Some of them are still forced to cut by the government with scissors. Today’s Chinese men can’t have long hair, and women can’t have short hair.
Under the original sin of the evil government of the Communist Party of China, “lower rank” is not worthy of “people”, which is also the connotation conveyed by comics. Who cares whether the upper class is a man or a woman? The government’s inaction on campus violence and the suppression of people’s protests have been blurred and even forgotten.
Whether there are enough live videos and photos of bullying or suppression, maintaining correct memory depends on videos and photos, not a few comics to avoid review. Even if it’s a mixture of men and women, is it really important?
Isn’t bullying itself more important than men and women if it is not properly handled?
Isn’t it more important for ordinary people to kneel at the feet of Chinese Communist Party officials to pray for justice than men and women?
Isn’t it important enough that Chinese citizens are violently suppressed by the Communist Party of China government to fight for justice and peace?
From these important things, I see “hatred” and “malice”, which are the gradually expanding contradictions brought about by public opinion under the rule of the Communist Party of China. Hatred and evil towards women can’t help but make me feel cold.
From the beginning of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, the Communist Party of China has constantly created internal struggles to divert the contradictions between the Party and the people. What’s more, after the government, such as the conflicts of the cultural class created during the Cultural Revolution, the conflicts between landlords and peasants, etc., are countless. Now I seem to see a new round of “internal hatred”, gender hatred.
On August 10, 2025, a small news that a boy failed to harassed girls and stabbed more than a dozen times in a row, which confirmed the portrayal image of the author’s comments who only paid attention to the “adversion between men and women”.
Now in China, when facing public tragedy, some male groups do not choose to criticize power or pay attention to institutional oppression, but persist in gender struggles. Behind this, it is not only the distortion of gender consciousness, but also a political coldness and a collective psychological defense mechanism after being disciplined.
In a democratic society, when the people face police violence, institutional indifference and judicial injustice, they will naturally pay attention to issues such as institutional reform and power checks and balances. However, in China, especially on social media platforms, some Chinese male netizens rarely seem to question key issues such as “why the police suppress the masses” and “whether schools bear the responsibility for supervision”. Instead, they are more concerned about “whether feminists hyped this matter” and “whether women beat women should be laughed at”.
This kind of “misfocus” has its root cause. It is the Communist Party of China in the decades that has been in power. Through a complete set of discourse systems, words such as “civil rights”, “human rights”, “democracy” and “rights protection” have been stigmatized, and negative labels such as “overseas forces” and “color revolution” have been implanted, and successfully established a conditioned reflex mechanism of “anti-power is danger” in public psychology. In particular, men, who have been indoctrinated as the “backbone of the country” and “the pillar of the family”, are encouraged to maintain the status quo, obey the authority, and avoid questioning the state apparatus inside and outside the system.
In other words, the way power disciplines men is not oppression, but assimilation. In contrast, women often face more direct oppression in employment, education and marriage, and are more likely to realize the oppression of the system on individuals. Therefore, women are often present in many rights protection issues. And those men who are unwilling to reflect on the system regard this kind of female participation as “provocation” – so feminism, even just women, becomes “the most vulnerable scapegoat” in their eyes.
In recent years, the Communist Party of China has continuously strengthened nationalist propaganda and regarded the “traditional gender order” as part of national rejuvenation. Promote “women should not be too strong” and “boys should be masculine”, deny women and advocate the traditional patriarchal family structure. The spread of this trend is closely related to the emergence of gender antagonism.
In the current propaganda ideology, men are indoctrinated with the collective role of “dominating society” and are given the high hope of “saving the Chinese nation”. And when they encounter anxiety such as internal volume, unemployment, marriage panic, etc. in real life, they cannot point to the system that really oppresses them – because it is defined as an “untouchable” red line. Therefore, they transferred their anger to women who “look more free than them” and built a “chain of exploitation in fantasy”:
“We treat cows and horses, but women still need rights?”
This idea is absurd but communicative. It establishes a hostile imagination between the oppressed, so as to cleverly blame the power system, let the people fight each other, and divert the contradictions.
Many studies have pointed out that China’s “misogyny culture” has risen significantly in recent years. From “bitch”, “princess disease” and “pastoral feminism” to “short hair = male” and “no makeup = neutral”, gender stereotypes have become the core content of social network language violence. This kind of misogynism does not come from a single hatred, but a composite of social structure and cultural emotions.
Anxiety is externalized under the imbalance in the marriage and love market. In the face of the real dilemma of “can’t afford to marry a wife” and “can’t find a partner”, men blame it on “women’s pickiness” and “women’s power”. When the upward channel of the social class is blocked, and the sense of deprivation under the solidification of the class leads to the hallucination of sexual privilege, some people need a target that “lives better than me” as an outlet – women who seem to be independent on the Internet become the most suitable object. And in the traditional concept, “men should earn money to support their families”. In reality, this role requires that men at the bottom often feel failure and shame, so they are more likely to use the network to attack “them” to cover up self-denial, which is actually the collapse of self-worth.
Back to the Jiangyou incident, I must soberly point out that a young girl was bullied and asked for help to no avail, which was a tragedy of common negligence between the campus and society; parents had to kneel at the feet of the powerful to protect their rights; and the people spontaneously protested peacefully, but were brutally suppressed by the police, which was a serious conflict of power and human rights.
These three questions should have become the focus of common questions in society.
But now, public opinion wastes time on “whether the rhythm of women’s rights” and “whether short hair is male”, which shows the success of the speech manipulation of the totalitarian system. As long as the masses stand against each other and bite each other apart, no one will ask again: “How did the school dereliction of duty?” Why does the public security suppress the masses?” Who is responsible for the fate of a girl?” How can Chinese people hold the Communist Party of China accountable?”
What really should be reflected on is how a system has created so many victims of distrust, disunity and irrationality. Among these victims, some men choose to avoid facing social structural problems with “anti-feminism”, which is not accidental, but the inevitable result of institutional design.
I can’t deny the importance of gender issues, but I must also emphasize that the basis of all rights is the rights of “people” – regardless of gender, region or class.
In a country where the power structure continues to create “secondary contradictions”, any individual who truly cares about justice and freedom should learn to resist the means of being manipulated by public opinion and refocus on the original sin of the system.
Today, the death of a woman and the abuse of a group of women are not a “war between the sexes”, but a common oppression of “ordinary people” by the indifference of the system. It is simplified to “gait between men and women”, which is only helping power shield the real crime.
In every social event where human life is at risk, in every Chinese struggle for the rights they should have, when the people are against the power of the Communist Party of China, if a person cares most about “men and women”, then he has already been trained by power to lose the ability to sympathize, judge and act.
And this is the most vigilant point.
And this kind of current situation is the favorite status quo of the Communist Party of China.
