On May 5, a tragedy occurred in the Yuehu campus of Hongqiao Primary School in Hanyang District, Wuhan: a first-grade primary school student was hit by a teacher's car and died after being sent to the hospital for ineffective rescue. On the 23th, the Hanyang District Education Bureau issued a circular to express sincere apologies to parents and society, while the teacher involved Liu has been criminally detained by the public security organs, and the principal and vice principal have been dismissed.
There are many places for reflection and criticism when children were hit and killed in schools, but this kind of accident occurred in what should be the safest place. Is the campus safe and secure? Is the teacher driving in a prohibited area? Does the school have basic medical treatment? The normal train of thought has to follow these directions, this is to comfort the deceased, but also to prevent "next time".
But the treacherous and changeable Internet can always find the angle of the side, this time it is "parents' makeup". After the accident, the child's mother went to the school several times, hoping to get an explanation for the child and asking the school director to apologize to the child. This is human nature, and there is nothing wrong with it.
But some comments immediately went crooked, commenting on the mother's appearance in the camera, "wearing delicate makeup, as if I rushed over after dressing up on purpose", "It's really quite beautiful", "Does this mother want to become an Internet celebrity"... Another netizen summarized the outfit: "Three days changed two pairs of Chanel shoes, changed two sets of black suits, should not be bad money." ”
This is probably the most boring kind of public opinion concern, to use a common phrase, "appropriation of public resources" - this concern is not only occupation, but even waste and even pollution. Does it matter what parents dress? Do you have to be unkempt? As for "changing two pairs of Chanel shoes in three days", not to mention whether this is a fact, even if it is, what can it say?
Further, this concern is not only nonsensical, but also cold-blooded. Behind these statements, there is actually a hint: the parent is not grieving, she still has time to wear makeup, and she still cares about her appearance. This is a lewd and dark psychology, and it is also a secondary injury to parents, putting a parent who is suffering from the loss of a child in the public opinion field to repeatedly pick.
From the perspective of public rationality, this kind of public opinion deflection is also a social hazard. When many people indulge in discussions that are almost gossip, the tragedy is gone, the reflection is gone, and the sympathy and comfort that society deserves for the victims is gone. This kind of boredom, almost a kind of cruelty, it is to consume people's perception of the meaning of life, it seems that even the unfortunate situation can be dissolved in an entertaining way. The seemingly lively discussion left only indifference and numbness.
In addition to these, there are also a number of critical parent voices on the Internet. Something like, "Is it for the child's face or your own face for the school to apologize?" "How to be responsible for the psychological shadows caused by the children in school to the other children?" All of this seems to blame the parents: you stop, let things pass.
Psychology believes that when people encounter painful trauma, they will activate the defense mechanism to dissolve the degree of pain through psychological activities such as avoidance, denial, rationalization, etc. Whether it's commenting on parents' makeup, blaming parents for defending their rights, it seems to be a similar mentality: we don't want to see pain, and we don't want to ask about responsibility.
This psychological defense mechanism may be reasonable for individuals, but it may not be applicable to society. The circumstances of the individual vary widely, but the collective constructed by the individual has a clear direction: it has always sought progress throughout history, and it is not subject to the will of the individual. Therefore, individuals can be depressed, but society can only cheer up, and people can only face the pain head-on and look for solutions to improve and solve it.
So, in this tragedy, people should not use any way to divert attention. It was a child who died in this tragedy, and we, as adults, should show a minimum of maturity and rationality, think more about how to protect the child and eliminate hidden risks, instead of indulging in noisy but empty gossip.
Chengdu Business Daily-Red Star News Special Commentator Qingbo