|
On October 21 2011 09:49 LoLAdriankat wrote:I refuse to believe that Chinese logic is this broken. It's just unbelievable. Surely they know Chen Xianmei did the right thing and they're shifting the blame to Chen because they don't want to feel bad about themselves? Right? .... T_T I'm just going to quote someone else because this has already been discussed. + Show Spoiler +On October 20 2011 04:07 Azarkon wrote:
Modern China has a very cynical society. I think most expats can tell you this much.
The desire to do good is correlated with the degree of trust that exists within a community, and there is very little trust in modern China. This has to do with political corruption, it has to do with crony capitalism, and it has to do with the day-to-day experience of the average Chinese person in a rapidly developing country where there is a lack of financial security and moral accountability.
If you lived in a society where you are constantly being screwed over by people around you, where lie and deceit is the norm of those in power, where goodness is not rewarded but punished, where bribery and nepotism determine your lot in life, and where the rule of law is non-existent for the rich and the powerful but endeavors to obstruct those trying to make an honest living, then apathy and indifference is your "typical" response.
The reason Chinese like Blasterion place their own family first to such a large degree, I gather, is that their family is the only people they can trust, and who they can trust to help them in times of need. If your expectation is that a stranger with no familial ties to you is unlikely to ever help you, then it is unlikely that you will be motivated to help strangers.
Apathy is a vicious cycle because it operates on the psychological notion of reciprocity. The only hope is that as people become more secure in their finances and individual lives, they will become more attentive to the rest of the society around them because, at the end of the day, they have to live in it. But there isn't a guarantee that, as society becomes richer, people will become more sympathetic towards each other. The income gap may never narrow, and the cycle of apathy may continue to sap the vitality of a society for centuries to come.
This is a serious problem indeed...and the issues are so deep and complex that there is no one single solution.
|
|
|
I don't know why the video was allowed on youtube when a soccer injury gets blocked because it has gruesome images. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be seen, I just think that it is odd youtube wasn't all over it. If I was young and impressionable I might have been seriously disturbed. As it was now I felt sick.
EDIT: I was not offended. Just shocked at the youtube discrepancy. Just merely making an observation. Sorry for the confusion.
|
On October 21 2011 14:15 shyman wrote: I don't know why the video was allowed on youtube when youtube soccer injury gets blocked because it has gruesome images. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be seen, I just think that it is odd youtube wasn't all over it. If I was young and impressionable I might have been seriously disturbed. As it was now I felt sick.
I am thankful that I am not, and never was, weak minded and hope that people will continue to post the truths that are out there and not take them down the instant some kid is offended by it (speaking about youtube).
While it was horrific, if you just ignore it, it doesn't go away.
|
Lost a bit of my soul watching the video and reading that article. I can't even put words on how angry this makes me feel.
|
From Reddit:
The woman ahs been forced to move out of her home, being scrutinized by her neighbors saying she did it for the fame.
article in spoiler
link + Show Spoiler +
Text + Show Spoiler + Making headlines around the world is the heart-breaking story of two-year-old Wang Yue. On October 13, a truck and a van ran over Wang Yue in Foshan, Guangdong Province, while 18 people either walked or cycled past the toddler before a scrap peddler, Chen Xianmei, finally rescued her.
This case has an eerie resemblance to the murder of Kitty Genovese. Sociologists coined the phrase ‘Genovese Syndrome’ or ‘the by-stander effect’ after the New York Times published an article, ‘Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police,’ which claimed that Genovese’s neighbours refused to intervene after she repeatedly screamed for help as she was being stabbed to death by her assailant. Since its publication, that article has largely been discredited: Genovese’s neighbours did in fact call the police, and did attempt to come to her rescue.
Unfortunately, and tragically, the Wang Yue case has been factually reported, and will be forever seared into the global consciousness through a security camera video that captured in its entirety the horrifying apathy of those 18 bystanders.
There’s an easy explanation as to why Wang Yue was left to die, why Chinese children are stealing from their own parents, why Li Gang’s son feels he’s above the law and public opinion, and why Guo Meimei is proud of siphoning off charitable funds for personal use: China has become an ultra-utilitarian society that concerns itself only with GDP growth, with rich lists, and with test scores. Psychologists have long known that there are two motivational centres in the human brain: one that’s utilitarian, rationale, and self-interested, and another that is social, emotional, and altruistic. We appeal to the former by emphasizing material results and rewards, and to the latter by emphasizing lofty principles and social ideals. The problem is that they’re mutually exclusive: that’s why during the subprime boom, Wall Street traders were willing to cheat friends and bankrupt nations to earn higher individual bonuses, and why dedicated teachers may feel insulted when offered cash bonuses.
China seems to have become so utilitarian that it can’t understand or even tolerate people who do things for altruistic reasons. The penniless scrap peddler rescued Wang Yue not because she was internally doing a cost-benefit analysis in her head or anticipating the material rewards of doing so (as some Chinese have accused her of doing), but because it was the right thing to do. So what’s happening right now to Chen Xianmei – the unwanted media attention, the unsolicited cash rewards, and public accusations of her being opportunistic – is itself just as tragic and as depressing as what happened to Wang Yue.
According to the Shanghaiist, the public attention has traumatized Chen Xianmei, and has prompted her to flee her home of Foshan:
‘Now with all of the media attention focused on her, as well as government officials and journalists knocking on her door night and day, Chen says she doesn’t even dare to turn on the television anymore.
‘“A lot of people are now saying that I’m doing it to get famous, and to get money. Even my neighbours are now saying so!” she said. “That really wasn’t my intention, and I’m so afraid of hearing what people are saying that I don't dare to watch the news. I’m not out for fame or money.”’
When asked what she thought about the negative things that people were now saying about her, Chen said, “I didn’t steal or rob. All I did was to save a child,” as tears began to fill her eyes.’
Chen Xianmei’s tears aren’t just for herself (she’s clearly being exploited by media reporters and those individuals who are donating money to her). They’re also for Wang Yue, and for a society that has become so hopelessly utilitarian it believes it can just buy someone’s goodness to appear less utilitarian.
Chinese believe by rewarding Chen Xianmei they’re encouraging more people to be like her. But what will probably happen in the wake of Chen Xianmei’s story is a lot of Chinese complaining to the media how they weren’t immediately flooded with praise and money for selflessly helping others.
Her life now turned upside down, Chen Xianmei herself said that if she were to be put back in the same situation, she’d still choose to save Wang Yue’s life. And she probably would – after weighing the pros and cons of doing so.
|
Still cant believe how the rescuer, Chen, is getting flak for attempting to save the girl! Unbelievable how people can be so jealous when there is money and attention involved
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
|
Wow, I knew that the chinese society is different(obviously), but before reading that article I wouldn't have thought that the differences are so big, it's nice to see though that there are still some people like the woman who saved the little girl even there.
Oh and
The penniless scrap peddler rescued Wang Yue not because she was internally doing a cost-benefit analysis in her head or anticipating the material rewards of doing so (as some Chinese have accused her of doing), but because it was the right thing to do.
Made me smile.
|
What a fucked up society....Made me feel so glad that my ancestors migrated out of that place. Seriously, helping someone gets you insults and mockery? fu1jehqdksihd91kdij[asoij9hxoajx!!!!!!!!!! Feel like nuking their entire country or something.... RIP, sadly you have to die for this society problem to be shown to the rest of the world
|
On October 22 2011 00:13 Black[CAT] wrote:What a fucked up society....Made me feel so glad that my ancestors migrated out of that place. Seriously, helping someone gets you insults and mockery? fu1jehqdksihd91kdij[asoij9hxoajx!!!!!!!!!! Feel like nuking their entire country or something.... RIP, sadly you have to die for this society problem to be shown to the rest of the world Dude calm down, nuking a entire country for something like this? I'm glad you are not in charge of anything.
|
I'm going to remember this the next time someone tries to convince me that China's utter obsession with GDP growth is a healthy obsession.
|
On October 22 2011 00:13 Black[CAT] wrote:What a fucked up society....Made me feel so glad that my ancestors migrated out of that place. Seriously, helping someone gets you insults and mockery? fu1jehqdksihd91kdij[asoij9hxoajx!!!!!!!!!! Feel like nuking their entire country or something.... RIP, sadly you have to die for this society problem to be shown to the rest of the world ya because nuking that country and killing a billion people is much better than not saving one girl, right?
|
On October 19 2011 10:31 MERLIN. wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2011 10:29 Xanbatou wrote:On October 19 2011 10:16 Blasterion wrote:On October 19 2011 10:14 Carson wrote:On October 19 2011 10:04 Blasterion wrote:On October 19 2011 09:52 Renent wrote:On October 19 2011 09:05 MERLIN. wrote:
Yeah someone smart would set up a barricade, anything all that shit beside the incident and wall the street off and call an ambulance, fuck it ifyou cut off traffic, but you DEFINATLY dont drag the body, ever!
You can help, but you dont have to kill the person in the process. In many cases you can be justified in moving a body, It all comes down to life over limb. And also, I am a short round shaped white boy if someone points a gun in my face they can have my money, shoes, hat whatever they want. You don't move the body ever, fuck limbs in that state you might be breaking arteries and only increasing the size of the wounds. You cannot move the patient. It depends on the situation, but 99% of the time, yes. However, if there is an immediate life-threat, then it's life over limb. Moving a person may cause bleeding or even paralysis, but not moving may cause immediate death. It's up to the discretion of the first-responder. Assuming neither of us has licensed training it should be a rule to never move it unless instructed by a professional Not true. If a car is on fire, pretty sure it's safe to say anyone inside is in immediate danger. to bad this entire topic isnt about a car on fire, so no, none of them should have even touched her to begin with, but they sure as hell should have blocked off the street and gotten help asap
No one should have touched her? What about initial assessment/management of ABCs, or initial treatments such as spinal motion restriction, external hemorrhage control, stabilization of flail chest, stabilization of fractures etc...
|
That is fucking brutal.....Seriously some people should not exist.
|
Wow that's horrible...feel sick after watching that....
|
On October 23 2011 06:21 Renent wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2011 10:31 MERLIN. wrote:On October 19 2011 10:29 Xanbatou wrote:On October 19 2011 10:16 Blasterion wrote:On October 19 2011 10:14 Carson wrote:On October 19 2011 10:04 Blasterion wrote:On October 19 2011 09:52 Renent wrote:On October 19 2011 09:05 MERLIN. wrote:
Yeah someone smart would set up a barricade, anything all that shit beside the incident and wall the street off and call an ambulance, fuck it ifyou cut off traffic, but you DEFINATLY dont drag the body, ever!
You can help, but you dont have to kill the person in the process. In many cases you can be justified in moving a body, It all comes down to life over limb. And also, I am a short round shaped white boy if someone points a gun in my face they can have my money, shoes, hat whatever they want. You don't move the body ever, fuck limbs in that state you might be breaking arteries and only increasing the size of the wounds. You cannot move the patient. It depends on the situation, but 99% of the time, yes. However, if there is an immediate life-threat, then it's life over limb. Moving a person may cause bleeding or even paralysis, but not moving may cause immediate death. It's up to the discretion of the first-responder. Assuming neither of us has licensed training it should be a rule to never move it unless instructed by a professional Not true. If a car is on fire, pretty sure it's safe to say anyone inside is in immediate danger. to bad this entire topic isnt about a car on fire, so no, none of them should have even touched her to begin with, but they sure as hell should have blocked off the street and gotten help asap No one should have touched her? What about initial assessment/management of ABCs, or initial treatments such as spinal motion restriction, external hemorrhage control, stabilization of flail chest, stabilization of fractures etc...
I take basic first aid training every 3 years for my job, and all he's trying to say is if there is a spinal injury its best not to pick up the child in fear of making it worse. I dont think he had any malice in his statement regarding this as you have assumed. Also, when doing the ABC's you would most certainly recognize a possible spinal injury, and if possible would not move the person, and instead support the head so the neck doesnt move any further.
|
On October 23 2011 06:41 eXigent. wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2011 06:21 Renent wrote:On October 19 2011 10:31 MERLIN. wrote:On October 19 2011 10:29 Xanbatou wrote:On October 19 2011 10:16 Blasterion wrote:On October 19 2011 10:14 Carson wrote:On October 19 2011 10:04 Blasterion wrote:On October 19 2011 09:52 Renent wrote:On October 19 2011 09:05 MERLIN. wrote:
Yeah someone smart would set up a barricade, anything all that shit beside the incident and wall the street off and call an ambulance, fuck it ifyou cut off traffic, but you DEFINATLY dont drag the body, ever!
You can help, but you dont have to kill the person in the process. In many cases you can be justified in moving a body, It all comes down to life over limb. And also, I am a short round shaped white boy if someone points a gun in my face they can have my money, shoes, hat whatever they want. You don't move the body ever, fuck limbs in that state you might be breaking arteries and only increasing the size of the wounds. You cannot move the patient. It depends on the situation, but 99% of the time, yes. However, if there is an immediate life-threat, then it's life over limb. Moving a person may cause bleeding or even paralysis, but not moving may cause immediate death. It's up to the discretion of the first-responder. Assuming neither of us has licensed training it should be a rule to never move it unless instructed by a professional Not true. If a car is on fire, pretty sure it's safe to say anyone inside is in immediate danger. to bad this entire topic isnt about a car on fire, so no, none of them should have even touched her to begin with, but they sure as hell should have blocked off the street and gotten help asap No one should have touched her? What about initial assessment/management of ABCs, or initial treatments such as spinal motion restriction, external hemorrhage control, stabilization of flail chest, stabilization of fractures etc... I take basic first aid training every 3 years for my job, and all he's trying to say is if there is a spinal injury its best not to pick up the child in fear of making it worse. I dont think he had any malice in his statement regarding this as you have assumed. Also, when doing the ABC's you would most certainly recognize a possible spinal injury, and if possible would not move the person, and instead support the head so the neck doesnt move any further.
Your post confuses me, I am responding to the "none of them should have even touched her" comment. Initially, it would be mechanism of injury that would make you suspicious of a potential spinal injury, this so you could safely take spinal precautions as you approach the person.
|
Finally took the courage to watch the video... I only lasted 3 seconds...
Well, there goes my sleep :/
The bystander effect... It sucks.
|
|
|
|