Comedian Pulls Back Curtain On Censorship Process After Army Joke Incident

The (talk) show is over. Comedian Li Haoshi, who made a joke involving the People’s Liberation Army last weekend, has been detained by Beijing police according to a report from BBC’s Chinese news service. As of publication, no other outlets have been able to verify the BBC’s reporting. While Li may still have his freedom, his stage career is likely over: the Chinese Performing Arts Association blacklisted him. Many of those who have spoken in Li’s defense have been censored. In the aftermath of the Li Haoshi Incident, one writer took to Weibo to write about their experience navigating censorship while writing for a standup comedy studio in Guangzhou. Their post was also censored. CDT has translated the censorship-related sections of the post, which finished with the writers’ lament: Chinese comics, they wrote, “expend 80% of their energy writing jokes, and 500% of their energy dealing with censorship”:

Before I started, my liaison at the studio forwarded me a document introducing the company’s culture and a long list of taboo topics. The list was created by the company itself, based on its understanding of industry trends. It made clear that all content about leaders, officials, extramarital affairs, homosexuality, gambling, poverty, and the pandemic was forbidden. This was not up for debate. All such content would be cut from scripts. Writing about those topics would be a waste of time, because they must be summarily avoided. 

[…] The most frustrating part of the job was preparing for official censorship. Every day, we’d spend a lot of time in meetings discussing it: “This gag is absolutely hilarious, but is it too risky? Should we soften it a little?” or “Does this content reference anything else that might get us in trouble?” “Will this joke get bad press? Is there any chance it gets reported to the police?” “This touches on a trending social issue, will it be too sensitive?”

[…] This in-house censorship process exhausted me. After I wrote a well-received joke about “health codes,” we had five meetings about whether discussing “health codes” counted as discussing the taboo topic of “the pandemic.”

[…] There was also a joke about “how to tell if someone on the bus is from Chaoshan” that satirized men from Chaoshan as “sexist, superstitious mommy’s boys.” We held two meetings about it and decided to ax the joke about sexism because we feared we’d be reported as “feminazis” (Keeping in mind the backlash faced by the feminist comedienne Yang Li [after she joked about overly confident average men.])

[…] Once our internal censorship process wrapped up, not a single word was potentially offensive (or so we thought). The script passed on a unanimous internal vote. The next step was submitting the script to the relevant government organs for a formal censorship review. 

The censorship process is never smooth. No matter what, the censors always jam you up for a bit. Anything less, and they’d look unprofessional. But their feedback is always vague: they never provide any specific commentary or suggestions for revisions. It’s on us to hold more meetings, try to figure out the offending bits, and revise the entire thing from the inside out. 

[…] The way I see it, comics expend 80% of their energy writing jokes, and 500% of their energy dealing with censorship. It’s a tremendous waste of resources. It’s also a waste of youth—there’s nothing funny or valuable about it. [Chinese]

Li Haosi is not the only high profile comedian to run into trouble in recent days. Nigel Ng, a UK-based Malaysian comedian, had his Weibo account suspended after a clip of him mocking Xi Jinping in his new show went viral. Ng once deleted a video from his Youtube channel that he shot with a prominent China critic after it caused a backlash in China. It is unclear what spurred his sudden reversal on criticizing China. It also seems that all foreigners are, at least temporarily, banned from performing on stage live in Beijing. A screenshot posted to Twitter purports to show that all bands and shows with foreign members have had their sets canceled. 

source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2023/05/comedian-pulls-back-curtain-on-censorship-process-after-army-joke-incident/

Global Policy Journal – China’s Role in Global Digital Repression

source https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/28/03/2023/chinas-role-global-digital-repression#new_tab

Sinocism – More weak economic data; Youth unemployment, China-Central Asia Summit; Struggle; Don’t joke about the PLA

source https://sinocism.com/p/more-weak-economic-data-youth-unemployment#new_tab

Word(s) of the Week: $2 Million Army Joke “Forge Exemplary Conduct, Fight to Win”

Word(s) of the Week: Forge Exemplary Conduct, Fight to Win (作风优良，能打胜仗 zuòfēng yōuliáng, néngdǎ shèngzhàng)

On Saturday at the Century Theater in Beijing, a stand up comic joked that his dogs’ pursuit of squirrels brought to mind the People’s Liberation Army. It drew laughs. An internet firestorm, a $2 million fine, and a police investigation followed. 

Li Haoshi, who performs under the stage name House, used the phrase “Forge Exemplary Conduct, Fight to Win” to describe his dogs’ hunting prowess. It’s a PLA slogan coined by Xi Jinping in 2013. An audio recording of the show reveals the crowd laughed. Later that evening, an anonymous audience member took to Weibo to allege that Li had disparaged “the People’s soldiers.” After a storm of online commentary, Li apologized for his “incredibly inappropriate metaphor.” Soon after, the authorities stepped in. The Beijing Municipal Culture and Tourism Bureau accused Li of “severely insulting” the PLA, indefinitely suspended all shows by the Shanghai comedy studio that employs him, confiscated the profits from the show in which he made the offending joke, and fined the studio nearly $2 million. Shanghai’s culture bureau also suspended all of the comedy studio’s performances. Shortly after, Beijing police announced that they had opened an investigation into Li. CDT has translated the relevant portion of the set that landed Li in hot water. In context, the joke seems rather tame: 

Upon moving to the cosmopolitan city that is Shanghai, I realized that everything must be done in the international style. So, I adopted two stray dogs. Technically speaking, they weren’t stray dogs. They were two feral dogs I scooped up from the wilderness near my house. I didn’t rescue them or anything—with their position on the food chain they absolutely did not need rescuing. Think of it as more of a Wife Swap situation, like they’re trying out city life for a while. These dogs were really the top of the food chain out there. The first time I saw them, I didn’t think I was looking at dogs. It was a scene straight out of Animal Planet. They were chasing a squirrel like they’d been shot out of a cannon. Most dogs are cute. They melt your heart, yadda yadda yadda. Not these guys. When I saw them, the phrase that flashed through my mind was: “Forge Exemplary Conduct, Fight to Win.” They’re simply the best. Walking down the Shanghai streets with them is really something else, the majesty! The only problem is they’re actually too athletic—with a body like mine I can’t keep up. [Chinese]

It is possible that Li’s joke had more bite to it than meets the eye. A famous scene from the 1956 propaganda flick “Battle on Shangganling Mountain” depicts People’s Volunteer Army soldiers chasing after a squirrel. Online, those angry with Li pointed to the “Shangganling” scene to accuse him of mocking “martyrs” of the Korean War. The accusation has serious weight. In 2022, ex-journalist Luo Changping was sentenced to seven months in prison for a Weibo post about the 2021 propaganda blockbuster “The Battle at Lake Changjin” in which he called some Chinese soldiers who froze to death during the Korean War “idiots.” As of publication, the Beijing police have not provided an update on their investigation of Li. 

Li had many defenders online, some of whom have also found themselves in legal trouble. Censorship repeats itself: the first time as farce, then again as farce. A Dalian woman who took to Weibo to defend Li was arrested by local police after a fellow netizen reported her for posting the question, “Aren’t all of the ‘People’s soldiers’ dogs?” Liberal state-media outlet Sixth Tone posted, and then deleted, an article that noted the crowd laughed and clapped after hearing the punchline, and that also documented online defenses of the joke. An essay decrying the tendency to turn the “free airing of views” into a sensitive matter was censored. “The free airing of views” is a phrase associated with the brief loosening of ideological strictures in 1957 that was followed by the Anti-Rightist Campaign, during which many of those who spoke up were brutally suppressed. Even quotidian non-political jokes were censored. One essay imagined a hypothetical stand-up performance where the comic begins the set with ten ridiculous caveats stating their respect for everyone and everything. The article concluded: “Okay, everyone. Due to time constraints, that’s a wrap. I’ve got another 90 terms and conditions to go through, so I encourage everyone to buy tickets to my next set. Another nine sets and it’ll finally be time to tell those jokes we’re so eager to hear.” That essay, too,was deleted by censors.

Some commentary made it past censorship. A WeChat author republished portions of a 2017 Chinese-language translation of a book of Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek’s jokes, leading with the phrase: “Comedy is a legitimacy crisis followed by the sudden appearance of a cornucopia.” A separate satirical WeChat account joked, “Here’s a stand up routine more suited for Chinese babies,” and added, “If Xiaoguo [Li’s employer] had put this on, they wouldn’t have had a problem. They still don’t get it”:

A village hosts an “Ideological and Political Talk Show” to propagandize the “20th Party Congress Spirit” [Chinese]

The tight suppression of comedy within Beijing has created a massive demand for trenchant political comedy performed outside of China’s borders. At The Wall Street Journal, Shen Lu reported on one of New York City’s hottest comedy acts, a monthly Mandarin language open-mic show that riffs on everything from sex to immigration to Xi Jinping’s authoritarian vision:

The dark humor taps into growing frustration among young Chinese people living overseas, many of whom have found themselves unexpectedly politicized by what they see as Xi’s reversal of the budding openness that defined China during their childhoods. Together, they are writing a new playbook for a kind of resistance that is almost impossible in their home country.

[…] “Many people in China have a lot to say but can’t,” said Susan Zhang, who regularly performs at the open-mic events in New York. “When we take the stage, we have to speak up.” 

[…] Performers and organizers of the open-mic events said they ultimately aspire to a democratic future for China, though they concede the prospects for such an outcome are vanishingly thin as long as Xi is in power. Chinese platforms that had hosted the show’s social-media accounts have taken them down. 

[…] For that reason, some people perform with face masks when the media are present at the open-mic events. Photographing, filming and recording of performers aren’t allowed. Staff members clear media and social-media coverage requests with each performer and watch for suspicious behavior in the audience. [Source]

A village hosts an “Ideological and Political Talk Show” to propagandize the “20th Party Congress Spirit” [Chinese]

source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2023/05/words-of-the-week-2-million-army-joke-forge-exemplary-conduct-fight-to-win/

Second Anniversary of Pioneering Blogger Program-Think’s Detention Passes

May 10, 2023 marked the second anniversary of the detention of program-think (Biānchéng suíxiǎng, 编程随想), an incisive and influential blogger who for twelve years managed to maintain his anonymity while maintaining a prolific output—penning hundreds of blog posts on topics as diverse as computer programming, Great-Firewall circumvention, political commentary, philosophy, historical analysis, e-book reviews, and current events in China and abroad.

Earlier this year, a court document published on the Chinese human rights website Weiquanwang revealed that program-think, whose real name is Ruan Xiaohuan (阮晓寰, Ruǎn Xiǎohuán), had been sentenced on February 10, 2023 to seven years in prison for “inciting subversion of state power” (a charge based on his online writings), two years deprivation of political rights, and a fine of 20,000 yuan. The harsh sentence was widely condemned, with PEN America’s China research and advocacy lead Angeli Datt commenting, “Blogging is not a crime and the heavy prison sentence on national security charges for his writing illustrates the dire situation for free expression in China.” Iris Hsu, China Representative for the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), called on Chinese authorities to immediately release Ruan, and added that his “unjust sentencing highlights how the Chinese government employs brutal tactics to suppress critical reporting on its internet policies.” Ruan himself declined to accept the ruling and lodged an appeal on the day of the verdict, but the court refused to recognize his two selected legal representatives (Shang Baojun and Mo Shaoping, both well-known human-rights lawyers), and instead gave him two state-assigned lawyers.

After news of the verdict surfaced, Ruan’s wife Bei Zhenying gave a series of interviews to CNN, RFA, and the CPJ detailing the charges against Ruan, her surprise at discovering that her husband was the legendary blogger program-think, and her concerns for his well-being and hopes for his eventual release. Ms. Bei has also established a Twitter account which currently has over 22,000 followers. Her Twitter bio urges followers to pay close attention to Ruan’s appeal, and to express solidarity but avoid talking about politics. In one tweet, she describes her husband as “a person who immerses himself in research and treasures time,” and says, “I want him to be free, to come home, and to recover.”

CDT editors have compiled and summarized a number of tweets from Ms. Bei’s account, describing how people might offer support to Ruan Xiaohuan as he appeals the court’s verdict and stands up for freedom of speech, as well as some supportive responses:

• Pay attention to his case, because your attention will help keep him safe.
• Please retweet so that more people may learn about and pay attention to his case, and generate more support for his pending appeal and release!
• No (monetary donations) needed, thank you. Your attention and support means everything to us.
• As a blogger, or online diarist, he posted on overseas blogs, exercised his freedom of speech, and did not speak about “inciting subversion” within China. I hope that his supporters who speak out here [on Twitter] will keep this in mind as they express their solidarity. Avoid talking about politics.
• There is no such thing as impeccable (i.e. invulnerable) online “security.” He is well aware of this himself, though his security skills and security awareness are top-notch.
• He is a rigorous thinker. His blog imparts knowledge, encourages independent and critical thinking, advocates online freedom, and strives to be thorough and objective in the information it presents.

Some Twitter users expressed their admiration and support:

jinzhi06933742: My children and I are learning so much from your husband’s articles, thank you very much!! We stand with you, and we share your ideals and values. In my opinion, your husband is a great warrior and teacher. He has done what he can, and we will do what we can, striving to make China a more civilized society.

zhngsn0909: Thank you for your hard work! Regardless of the outcome, your husband will surely be honored with a great place in history.

stfrt3: Please tell your husband that many of us are paying attention and are supportive, and we hope he can stay healthy and keep his spirits up. Thank you.

cohlint007: “Man has but one short life; grass, but one brief springtime.” Mr. Ruan is worthy of inclusion in the history books. A true patriot, a human being writ large. Respect.

realcaixia: Pay attention to the plight of Mr. Ruan Xiaohuan (program-think) and his wife, Ms. Bei. The more witnesses, the better. Witnessing is solidarity.

Wei_inDe: Your husband is brave, clear-headed, and wise. He has the respect and gratitude of many Chinese people. That, at least, will never change.

fling_wang: It is people like Mr. Ruan who keep me from despairing about this country … Highest respects to Mr. Ruan! [Chinese]

It is difficult to overstate how influential program-think’s writings are. Over the course of 4497 days, Ruan Xiaohuan penned 712 blog posts on a dizzying array of topics. (Over one hundred of these were cited as “evidence” to justify the stiff seven-year prison sentence meted out by the court.) Below are a number of tributes collected by CDT that describe his essential contributions to Chinese online discourse over the years:

From an article by netizen “47小管家” upon the first anniversary of program-think’s disappearance:

program-think, hero of China’s Internet era and anonymous pioneer of resistance against the party-state, is destined to be recorded in history. Not only is he the “godfather of GFW-circumvention,” but also a great enlightener. The breadth of his knowledge is astounding, ranging from infosec to political science to psychology and beyond.

A comment from “OverthrowCPC” posted to the old version of the Quora-like website Pincong (品葱):

Of all the overseas “subversive” counter-brainwashing content out there, program-think’s blog offers by far the most in-depth, rational, objective, and highest-quality content, second to none. It is no exaggeration to say that this blog is essential reading for all those beginners who have just learned how to scale the Great Firewall.

A comment from netizen “co-memory”:

program-think is the “Tank Man” of the digital age. Even greater, perhaps, because a brief moment of courage pales in comparison to persistent, long-term success.

From an essay by China Digital Times Founder and Editor-in-Chief Xiao Qiang, upon program-think being chosen as the 2014 “Chinese Internet Hero of the Year”:

I hope that future generations will remember the real-life individuals—whether named, unnamed, or anonymous—who carried out those small acts of resistance that laid the groundwork for an era of freedom, and that they will recognize their wisdom, courage, persistence, and sacrifice. In each and every one of program-think’s blog posts, readers will find proof positive of 21st-century Chinese people’s online resistance to tyranny and their struggle for freedom. [Chinese]

In addition to his writings, program-think’s various interactions with readers in the comments section of his blog offer clues to his motivations for blogging, how he viewed his relationship with readers, and his philosophical attitude toward the possibility of being unmasked or apprehended by the authorities. CDT Chinese editors have compiled some of the comments to and from program-think in the comments section under one of his best-known blog posts, “A Security Guide for Political Activists”:

From: Anonymous, January 30, 2019 21:56:00

He finally updated the blog. I was really worried that something had happened to him.

From: Anonymous, January 30, 2019 23:32:00

Anonymous supporter here. Mr. program-think is the most enlightened person I have ever met.

From: 灭绝支那贱畜, January 31, 2019 00:23:00

It’s been a long time since his last blog update. What I appreciate most are the technical articles. This article is a great summary, because it systematically explains the key points about network security and anonymization. It will prevent many opponents of the regime from being locked up and thrown in prison. By saving people from that fate, the author of this blog has done us all a tremendous service.

From: 辛德林记, January 31, 2019 00:44:00

The CCP dictatorship is unyielding in so many areas, but it can’t do a damn thing about program-think. That’s fucking awesome, totally amazing.

From: 比你好五倍, January 31, 2019 20:18:00

You’ve survived the first decade, now what comes next? I have been following this blog for nearly 10 years. But when you oppose the powers-that-be for so long, there will be an inevitable day of reckoning.

From: program-think, February 1, 2019  18:36:00

To: dir. Even if I am exposed and physically annihilated tomorrow, it will still have been worth it. (I said something similar in the comments section a few years ago.) Because I have already influenced so many people.

From: Anonymous, February 1, 2019 16:47:00

I’ve been reading your blog for eight years, but never dared to leave a comment. I still remember what the person who taught me to “scale the wall” said to me: “Get a look at the wider world.” This blog was first recommended to me by him. For so many years, I’ve been quietly promoting GFW-circumvention technology to those who need it, just like how that person taught me back then. Today, reading program-think’s look back at the last decade, my eyes teared up a few times. It’s hard to imagine just how much pressure program-think has had to deal with all these years. I hope that one day program-think will become a shining symbol, encouraging more people to go forward!

From: program-think, February 1, 2019 18:17:00 

To: 61楼的网友. Thank you very much for your support as a long-time reader! Of course, I also want to thank the person who taught you to bypass the Great Firewall and who recommended my blog. Many readers are quietly helping me to spread the word about this blog and related tutorials. Like us, they too are the “gravediggers” of the CCP! [Chinese]

Not long after program-think was detained in 2021, CDT translated a representative selection of his writings, including a piece on the “Princeling Network Map” he published on Github; an essay on the origins of the meme “Zhao family member,” used to describe CCP cadres and those embedded in the power structure; and an account of how he managed to elude the authorities and maintain his anonymity for over a decade. CDT editors chose him as our “2021 Person of the Year,” and have also compiled Chinese-language summaries of his top-ten blog posts and a timeline with important milestones in his 12-year blogging career.

Tony Hu contributed to this post.

source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2023/05/second-anniversary-of-pioneering-blogger-program-thinks-detention-passes/

Hong Kong Government Purges Politically Sensitive Books from Libraries

Local media outlets in Hong Kong report that hundreds of books on political topics including the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre are no longer available in the city’s public libraries, after the city’s Leisure and Cultural Services Department ordered librarians to ensure that their collections contained nothing in violation of the National Security Law. This is the latest example of government censorship in Hong Kong that further restricts free speech and attempts to rewrite history.

Helen Davidson from The Guardian described the extent of the book purge:

On Tuesday, Hong Kong media outlets reported the review appeared to have stripped from public shelves hundreds of books about the massacre of student protesters on 4 June 1989. Photon Media searched for 149 titles that were available in 2009 and found only four still listed.

Ming Pao reported that about 40% of politically themed books, magazines and videos available at the end of 2020 were gone, 96 of them removed this year. It said a number of documentaries, including by the public broadcaster RTHK, were also absent.

A Guardian search of the Hong Kong public libraries’ online catalogue returned some titles related to the Tiananmen massacre but most were shown to have “no lending copy available on shelf”. Four books on the “umbrella movement” protests were shown to have copies available. [Source]

After government complaints last week, Ming Pao axed its satirical artist known as Zunzi following his 40-year tenure at the outlet. Later, his books began disappearing from public libraries. RFA found that around 250 books had been culled, three times as many as during a similar action in 2021. Bloomberg reported that a search of the Hong Kong Public Libraries’ catalog on Tuesday yielded no results for terms related to the Tiananmen Massacre. 

At Global Voices, Oiwan Lam provided a partial list of authors that were purged:

Ma Ngok – a political scientist specializing in Hong Kong politics and democratization. He is currently an associate professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. 

Hui Po Keung – a cultural studies scholar and a trustee of the “612 Humanitarian Relief Fund,” which helped protesters pay for their legal and medical bills after the 2019 pro-democracy protests. He was arrested on charges of foreign collusion under the National Security Law (NSL) and is now out on bail. 

Margaret Ng – a barrister and former member of the legislative council. She is also out on bail under charges of foreign collusion as a trustee of the “612 Humanitarian Relief Fund.”

Allan Au – a veteran journalist and journalism lecturer at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. He was arrested, accused of “conspiracy to publish seditious materials,” and is released now on bail.

Szeto Wah – the founder of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China and the Hong Kong Professional Teachers’ Union. The prominent democracy activist passed away in 2011.

Sam Ng – a veteran media worker and a prominent satirical news commentator on the TV news program “Headline News,” which has since been banned.

Tsang Chi-ho – a radio host who also played a major role in “Headline News.”

Justin Wong – is an award-winning artist, political cartoonist, and former assistant professor at Baptist University.

Chin Wan – a prominent writer and localism advocate. 

Simon Shen – a political scientist. [Source]

Defending these changes, Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee stated that the books removed from the city’s public libraries were still accessible in private shops. But many Hongkongers, including moderate or establishment ones, expressed concern. “If a government cannot even convince its people why certain books – including those apparently non-political – are banned, it might have difficulties in winning trust on other issues,” warned Simon Chu Fook-keung, a former acting director of the city government’s archives from 1999 to 2003. At the South China Morning Post, Natalie Wong reported that John Lee did not clearly explain the criteria for censoring the books in Hong Kong’s libraries:

Hong Kong’s leader on Tuesday defended the removal of more public library books over political sensitivities, saying material circulated had to “serve the interest” of society without breaching the law.

Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu, while insisting such publications were still available in private bookshops, did not address whether the city’s freedom of access to information would be undermined if censorship standards were not transparent, as suggested by critics.

[…] “The principles we use, which I support, are to ensure that there is no breach of any laws in Hong Kong, including, of course, copyrights, etc; and also, if they spread any kinds of messages that are not in the interests of Hong Kong.”

He did not address how certain non-political titles could be linked to national security threats but offered his “strong confidence” in the professionalism of colleagues at the Leisure and Cultural Services Department in ensuring public circulation “served the interest” of the city. [Source]

These book purges come just weeks after Hong Kong held a ceremony for World Book Day, at which Kevin Yeung, the Secretary for Culture, Sports, and Tourism, said that “local public libraries have been nurturing reading as a consistent habit of the public through quality and diversified collections,” according to Xinhua. Earlier in March, Hong Kong police arrested two men for possessing children’s books that were deemed to be “seditious.” This marks the first arrest for merely owning the books, after the publishers were jailed last year.

Along with other government measures that wield the National Security Law against citizens’ rights, these book purges contribute to the erasure of Hong Kong memory. In an op-ed for The New York Times, Louisa Lim described how this parallels the state-induced amnesia in the mainland, but argued that such revisionism will be met with fierce resistance:

Revisionism — with its ancillary altering or obliteration of memory — is an act of repression. It’s the same playbook China used after violently crushing the 1989 pro-democracy demonstrations in Beijing. Then, state-induced amnesia was imposed gradually. At first the government churned out propaganda that labeled those protests as a counterrevolutionary rebellion that had to be suppressed. But over the years, the state slowly excised all public memory of its killings.

In Hong Kong the silence has set in much more quickly. The gagging of dissenting voices and editing of the past has happened at warp speed, mirroring the blink-and-you-miss-it modern news cycle. This has its own logic; the faster the blanket of silence is thrown over Hong Kong, the less time there is for criticism to take root, and the faster the next phase of transformation — whatever that may be — can be introduced. The cycle of unmaking accelerates.

[…] But Hong Kongers don’t easily forget.

When the bloody suppression of the Tiananmen movement could not be publicly commemorated in China, people in Hong Kong took it upon themselves to hold annual vigils for those killed and imprisoned in Beijing and elsewhere. Now it falls to a new Hong Kong diaspora to keep alive the memory of what happened to their own city. [Source]

When you find out that your own Amnesia book has been disappeared from HK public libraries. It should not come as a surprise, given recent moves, and yet it shows how quickly the authorities are moving. https://t.co/L1FyXsNl3I

— Louisa Lim (@limlouisa) May 16, 2023

This ongoing censorship spree in Hong Kong is chilling, if not surprising. Will online publications be affected? In 2019, @asiancha published an entire Issue devoted to Tiananmen and it remains on our front page. This isn't going to change anytime soon. https://t.co/F1JrresCwj pic.twitter.com/YkkakEZJz4

— t (@myetcetera) May 17, 2023

source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2023/05/hong-kong-government-purges-politically-sensitive-books-from-libraries/

Landmark LGBTQ+ Center Closes Amidst State Push For Straight Marriage

The shuttering of the Beijing LGBT Center marks the latest setback for China’s queer community. In a terse statement published to WeChat, the Center offered no explanation for its sudden closure beyond force majeure. Founded in 2008, the Center had been a landmark initiative to provide community space, medical advice, and cultural programming for the capital’s sexual and gender minorities. The Center’s unexplained demise is further evidence of the state’s apparent turn against the LGBTQ+ community, following the censorship of queer media platforms, the disciplining of university students for handing out rainbow flags, state media’s recent use of the phrase “westernized lifestyle” as a euphemism for lesbianism, and a media regulatory body’s insulting criticisms of gender non-conforming men. The fact that the closure was announced on the eve of May 17 International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia made the loss all the more poignant. At The China Project, Zhao Yuanyuan reported on international and domestic reactions to the Center’s closing: 

“The Center was so many things: a hub, a refuge, a flagship, a festival,” Darius Longarino, a research scholar at the Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai Center, who has worked extensively with experts in China seeking to advance LGBTQ rights, told The China Project. “They provided services to the community like mental health counseling and HIV testing and ran myriad activities like film screenings, exhibitions, English corners, parties, and discussion groups on coming out and intimacy — and so much more.”

[…] “The Center has been under constant scrutiny and surveillance for its work, but because it’s been in operation for a long time and had been actively negotiating with the authorities, it still managed to maintain its major programs. As I know, more and more of its activities were affected and forced to stop recently,” [Stephanie Yingyi Wang, an assistant professor of gender and sexuality studies at St. Lawrence University] said. “I can only say that this closure seems inevitable in the long run, but I still admire how long the Center has stood up against immense pressure and remained to be the beacon for many.”

[…] On Weibo, the news of its sudden shutdown has triggered an outpouring of sadness and reminiscences about its importance to the community. “Ten years ago when I just graduated from school, I achieved self-acceptance here. Thank you and I hope future generations of sexual and gender minorities can still find their organization,” a longtime fan wrote on the Center’s Weibo page. “We don’t say goodbye. We say ‘see you down the road,’” a Weibo user who used to volunteer at the Center commented. [Source]

Darius Longarino, the Yale Law School research scholar quoted above, posted a thread to Twitter expanding on the Center’s importance: 

The Beijing LGBT Center announced its closure today. Founded in 2008, the Center was a vibrant community space & a groundbreaking advocacy organization. Their team spearheaded pioneering research, and built networks of LGBTQ-affirming health & business professionals. 1/5 pic.twitter.com/mfZlpLrKSD

— Darius Longarino 龙大瑞 (@DariusLongarino) May 15, 2023

The Center also focused on developing LGBTQ-affirming health professionals so LGBT ppl could find appropriate care (rather than, for eg, encounter a therapist who would push them to pursue conversion therapy). English-language state media often highlighted the Center's work. 3/5 pic.twitter.com/S4u1SMMaGe

— Darius Longarino 龙大瑞 (@DariusLongarino) May 15, 2023

are struggling to survive. How long they can hold on for (or, rather, be allowed to hold on for) is unclear. For more on the closing of space for LGBTQ expression and advocacy please see: https://t.co/qiG0i2lMBi 5/5

— Darius Longarino 龙大瑞 (@DariusLongarino) May 15, 2023

The exact reason for the Center’s closure remains unclear. A former volunteer told Bloomberg that it was the result of a long-term pressure campaign from a number of actors, including the Center’s neighbors. The Center is but one of many LGBTQ+ organizations to be forced to shut down. In at least one case, the Chinese government has detained LGBTQ+ leaders and forced them to close their groups as a precondition of release. Huizong Wu at the Associated Press:

“They are not the first group, nor are they the largest, but because Beijing LGBT Center was in Beijing, it represented China’s LGBT movement,” said one Chinese activist who requested anonymity out of fear for his safety. “In our political, economic and cultural center, to have this type of organization. It was a symbol of the LGBT movement’s presence.”

[…] The well-known group called LGBT Rights Advocacy China, which brought strategic lawsuits to push for policy change and expanding rights, closed down in 2021. The group’s founder was detained and the organization’s end was a condition of his release, according to an activist close to the group who was previously based in China but has since relocated abroad. He declined to be named out of fear of government retribution toward family in China.

[…] “Their shutdown makes one feel very helpless. As groups large and small shut down or stop hosting events, there’s no longer a place where one can see hope,” said another Chinese activist who requested anonymity for fear of government retribution. [Source]

It just feels so utterly hopeless. I know that queers & feminists in China know how to work a loophole, a cat door, a hairline fracture, a whisper, a metaphor, but soon that's too subtle and quiet to reach the people who need it. A secret handshake can't replace a lighthouse.

— Jinghua Qian (@qianjinghua) May 15, 2023

On the same day the Center was shut down, Taiwan’s legislature passed an amendment allowing same-sex couples to adopt children. The stark contrast fueled debate on Weibo: “Now we can only wish Taiwan will be free forever,” one user wrote. Some conservative mainland commentators hailed the Center’s closure as a victory over Western influence.

While cracking down on LGBTQ+ rights, the state has pushed a heteronormative natalist policy it hopes can stave off negative economic consequences from its falling population. India has overtaken China in total population, marking the first time since the U.N. began tracking the statistic in 1950 that China has not been the world’s most populous country. The government hopes to boost births after decades of mandating that most couples only have one child, an initiative that has been met with skepticism. In May, the nominally independent China Family Planning Association announced a “pilot project” across 20 cities to create a “New Era Marriage and Childbearing Culture,” in an effort to encourage couples to have more children. From state media outlet Global Times: 

The projects will focus on tasks including promoting marrying and having children at appropriate ages, encouraging parents to share child-rearing responsibilities, and curbing high “bride prices” and other outdated customs, said association officials during an event held in Guangzhou, South China’s Guangdong Province on Thursday. The cities include Guangzhou and Handan in North China’s Hebei Province. 

[…] “The society needs to guide young people more on the concept of marriage and childbirth, and encourage young people to get married and have children,” [independent demographer He Yafu] said.

Indeed, efforts to improve society’s marriage culture and environment will hedge against the possible negative effects of some of the demographic downturn, analysts noted. [Source]

Most of the state’s efforts to increase marriage and childbearing target women and put the onus of population decline on them. A small town in southeast China had unmarried women sign a pledge to reject high “bride prices,” a traditional cash gift to a potential wife’s family as a precondition for engagement. The government blames exorbitant bride prices, which can reach $50,000, for low marriage rates in rural areas. Other local governments have come up with similarly eccentric schemes to increase birth and marriage rates. In Hebei, officials had a dance troupe bang pots and drums while chanting such slogans as “Giving birth is an important part of life!” One rural county in Hunan province came up with “Operation Bed Warming,” an initiative that pressured local women to marry local men, rather than looking for potential partners in distant urban areas. Jilin has begun allowing single women access to in vitro fertilization, a policy that members of a national political advisory body have recommended be expanded nationwide. In January, Sichuan began allowing unmarried couples to legally add their children to their household registration. A number of private Chinese companies have begun offering women subsidies to freeze their eggs, thus allowing them to delay pregnancy until they so choose. 

For many Chinese women, these policies do not address their fundamental concerns about childbirth, namely that traditional social mores will bind them to the home and preclude them from pursuing personal and professional opportunities. One woman told Al Jazeera: “I don’t want my life to only be about taking care of kids, doing housework and taking care of my husband’s parents when they get old, but I feel like many families expect that from a married woman in China.” The government’s campaign to push marriage and childrearing has instead birthed a highly sardonic self-appellation among Chinese women: “huminerals,” a term for people destined to be relentlessly exploited until they’re tossed onto the slag heap of history. 

source https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2023/05/landmark-lgbtq-center-closes-amidst-state-push-for-straight-marriage/