How do you see the rights and wrongs of the fighting orphans returning home? Is it "eating yams in comfort" or "eating beef in sorrow"? Should we acquiesce to the club's gory yet heartfelt offer of help, or applaud the mythic narrative of rescuing the fighting orphans? Either way, these orphans, who have been caught by fate once before, are once again caught in the bottomless pit of online public opinion - the binary choice between "bad" and "worse".

How can exposure become a form of "victimization"?

When the video came out, questions about "fighting orphans" abounded on the Internet. On the one hand, they were saddened by the fact that such brutal fighting had fallen on minor orphans, and on the other hand, they were y concerned about whether they would be able to gain a foothold in society with fighting as their only skill.

It is true that orphans can't be helped only by providing them with basic food and clothing, but also by ensuring that their quality of life and freedom of development are the key to help them. Fighting orphans are taken in by social organizations and are wrapped up in commercial interests, making their lives much more uncertain.

In the video, although the orphans are very satisfied with the status quo, but day after day of bloody fighting has become the only theme of life of the orphans, their health, medical care, education and other aspects of their rights are not guaranteed, whether their future life will also be uncertain.

When the video came out, the orphans were about to be repatriated to Liangshan, but many netizens said that such a "rescue" was in fact a kind of "victimization". Simply based on moral judgment, the rescue of the orphans home, ostensibly to help them, but do not know that they will be sent back to a worse living environment - to eat worse yams, do more difficult farm work.

But is this exposure really a form of "victimization"?

Just because the orphans have a stable place to stay, the government's assistance can not be ignored. The first thing you need to do is to get your hands on some of the most popular products and services in the world, and then you can get your hands on some of the most popular products and services in the world. If not "exposed", these hidden "rights" will be farther and farther away from this group of orphans.

In the movie "Wrestling! Dad", the father's choice even if it is against the wishes of the child, but the starting point of its behavior and the soil foundation is still the trust of kinship, so there is no need to do too much criticism of it. However, in the fighting orphans, the club "for the good of the child" basis is not sufficient, "exposure" at least help the public to figure out whether there is a chain of interests, don't let these underage children in the first step into the community ate the "The first step in the process is to make sure that you are not a victim of a crime," he said.

Moreover, in the video, head coach Enbo said that there are only so many gold belts and first places, after all, and if they don't stand out enough, they will have to go back. In the midst of this scarcity, fight orphans are still longing for UFC gold. The prospect of such a choice is illusory, and the logic of "stay if you fight well, go back if you don't" is contrary to the original intention of giving a helping hand.

Would it be better for fighting orphans to go back to school than to be in the ring?

Two arguments have emerged in the current online court of public opinion: a romantic idealism that the Education Bureau will eventually return the fighting orphans to a better life after it intervenes in the investigation; and a rational empiricism that puts aside the clanging reasoning of the legal provisions and repatriates the orphans after they are returned to their homes.

Whether it's the child labor incident in Shenzhen in 2013 or the child labor incident in Changshu in 2016, things have always evolved in a very routine way after the media scrambled to report on it, and the same is true of the fighting orphans incident today - the local education bureau intervened, repatriated the orphans, and sent out an article condemning fighting clubs for using minors for commercial gain. for exploiting minors for commercial gain, and so on.

Netizens have questioned: what happens after the repatriation? What will be the life of these orphans? Perhaps the matter will be in such an awkward position even after the online public opinion has calmed down.

In such a cool climate of public opinion, the so-called rational "second-worst choice" has accidentally become the mainstream of public opinion. Those who hold such views believe that it is better to stay in the fighting field and have meat to eat than to go back to Liangshan and eat boiled potatoes.

Such a viewpoint has to force us to convert the factual weighing dimension to a more realistic logic, although the fighting orphans are secretly living a kind of hardly completely legal and high-risk way of life, but this is at least goodbye to the Liangshan kind of tattered survival, goodbye to the low-quality life of the food is only fruitful. Once, an elementary school student's article "Tears", which was called "the saddest essay in history" by netizens, spread like wildfire on the Internet - "The meal was ready, but my mother passed away", and its author is a typical Liangshan orphan. the quintessential orphan.

What is real? For the fighting orphans, the real "iron cage" in the fighting arena is more real and easier than the "iron cage" of despair in their hometown. Lu Xun once put forward "Nala after the departure of how" social torture, "fighting orphans back to their hometown how" is the current public opinion in the field of unfinished questions.

Talking about the right to education with children who have not yet had enough to eat is both cold and extravagant.

The second worst choice logic, out of focus where the key

One is to hope that the local government to save the distant future, one is willing to poor fate with fists to fight out of the life of the helpless corner, is it fighting orphans can only be in the "bad" and "worse". The "bad" and "worse" in the mercenary logic of choice?

This forced second-best choice, you can not say it has much malice, but called the bottom of the heart cold.

"Fighting" and "orphans", in this path of personal heroism, "fighting fate" has been overly gory to emphasize the need for rescue. But the "orphan narrative" has been ignored in the spiral of public opinion, and the phrase "handed over to the government" has not been used.

Perhaps staying in the fight can change your life, but don't forget that society should never huddle the "poor" children's future in an iron cage of a fight. The bottom line of society can not be overstepped, the goodwill of humanity can not be compromised, indulgence fighting orphans of the second worst choice, but also will become another stream of cold air to them.

In fact, the binary discussion on the "pros and cons of fighting orphans going home" has gradually shifted the focus of public opinion. Behind the seeming buzz of public opinion, the question of "what measures the government will take after returning home" remains unchanged.

Is it possible that China's current pattern and volume can't carry these orphans through their childhood? Abandonment of functional responsibility, avoiding social responsibility, and simply drive the fighting orphans to the "fate" of the road, these children are bound to have no "poetry and faraway places".

In this matter, the intellectuals do not hope that the wave of public opinion, they are still forgotten in the corner of the Daliang Mountain - although such an expectation is a little weak, but also always let the heart have a light, for the group of lonely life to move forward.