[January 8, 2024] At noon today, Weibo blogger @Gu Yanyou announced that Zhang Xuefeng had been officially prosecuted, and the case had entered the stage of online case filing and review. The lawsuit stems from Zhang Xuefeng's controversial remarks in December last year, which degraded liberal arts majors as "licking", which sparked widespread concern and discussion in society.
Zhang Xuefeng's relevant remarks on December 9, 2023, summarizing the liberal arts major as "service industry" and describing it with the word "licking", immediately caused heated discussions on the Internet. In the face of **of**, Zhang Xuefeng issued two apology statements in a row on his personal social account, but it did not seem to calm the public's dissatisfaction.
The prosecution party, @Gu Yanyou, published a long post on Weibo, expressing strong dissatisfaction with Zhang Xuefeng's remarks. He pointed out that liberal arts students are not as unbearable as Zhang Xuefeng described, with 360 lines, and there is no distinction between high and low professions. He also believes that Zhang's remarks not only disparage the liberal arts, but also cause misunderstanding and harm to a wide range of service industries.
The controversy of Zhang Xuefeng's remarks lies in his simple generalization and labeling of professions and industries. Today, the liberal arts and services sector encompasses a wide range of highly skilled, high-IQ jobs that should not be simply summarized and disvalued. Zhang Xuefeng's statement touched the society's attention to professional equality and respect for diversity.
For this prosecution, ** shows a complex and changeable attitude. On the one hand, there are voices that support @Gu Yanyou, believing that irresponsible remarks should be resisted and corrected;On the other hand, some people believe that Zhang Xuefeng's apology should be accepted and that his personal views should be expressed freely. The prosecution is not only a legal challenge to Zhang's remarks, but also to some extent reflects widespread concern about professional dignity and freedom of expression.
The progress and final verdict of this case will become an important case on the boundary between freedom of speech and public morality on the Internet. At the same time, it also reminds public figures to be more cautious when making statements to avoid unnecessary misunderstanding and harm to specific groups or fields.
The information in the article is on the Internet, if there is any infringement, please contact to delete.