Women in contemporary feudal society face particularly severe oppression. Capitalism offers no way out for these oppressed women; when they suffer sexual harassment and assault, they often have nowhere to seek justice. Even through certain struggles, they cannot make their oppressors face the deserved punishment. The feudal government turns a blind eye to this phenomenon, secretly condoning the continued growth of crimes against women. Ouyang Xiaoxiao’s experience is a case in point.
“The Chinese government is accustomed to using various spiritual opiates to numb the people’s consciousness of struggle, and because women are subjected to especially deep oppression, the dosage of opiates injected into them by capitalist society is also particularly large” (《中国未来革命的道路》). Ouyang Xiaoxiao, poisoned by bourgeois aesthetic concepts, enjoys dressing herself up as a vase. During university, she became a portrait model on campus and often posted her photos on social media. In August 2022, Li Yongping saw her photos on social media, viewing her as a high-priced commodity and sexual tool he wanted to acquire. With ulterior motives, he contacted Ouyang Xiaoxiao, approaching her under the guise of “collaborative photoshoots,” then pretended to be a gentleman, boasting about graduating from Beijing Film Academy, and eagerly fawning over her. Li Yongping is a director who previously ran a selfie studio and KTV, living a wealthy life, contaminated by reactionary small-bourgeois rightist ideology. Knowing she liked yogurt, he brought yogurt every time he met her, trying to please her. Knowing her birthday, he bought her gifts, drove hours to celebrate her birthday. During each contact, he maintained a proper distance, but this wolf in sheep’s clothing sought to seduce Ouyang Xiaoxiao through commodity exchange, though his attempt failed.
In June 2023, Ouyang Xiaoxiao explicitly stated that there was no need to continue contact. Li Yongping demanded a formal meeting. During their last conversation, she analyzed their “incompatibility,” hoping he would respect her decision. After that, they had little interaction. Ouyang Xiaoxiao also graduated from university and entered the workforce, but by then, evil had already grown in the shadows. Li Yongping completely tore off his “gentlemanly” mask online. He registered a fake account using Ouyang Xiaoxiao’s name, stole her pictures from various social platforms, and used AI deepfake technology to create pornographic videos involving her. Additionally, he joined numerous male groups on Telegram, such as “Sharing My Friends’ Circles,” with 3,445 members. He fabricated stories of her promiscuity, fantasized about her, posted stolen photos of her with insulting comments. In real life, he still tried every means to spy on her. On April 26, 2024, after drinking, Li Yongping called her to harass her, pretending to be sad and affectionate, disgusting her by claiming he was attending a friend’s wedding, revealing that he was still stalking her, even eating breakfast downstairs from her home, knowing her work schedule. Hearing this, Ouyang Xiaoxiao only felt fear. It was not until July 9 that she learned of Li Yongping’s heinous deeds behind her back.
On July 9, a girl named Xiaoya privately messaged Ouyang Xiaoxiao, revealing that someone claiming to be her boyfriend was spreading and insulting her on Telegram using her photos. She asked a friend to find a “clone account” under her name on X and decided to fight back, reporting the case to the local police that night. After reporting, that same night, Xiaoya received a message from the “clone account” owner (Li Yongping), learning that he knew some real information about Ouyang Xiaoxiao, even that she “had a cousin in high school.” Based on this, Ouyang Xiaoxiao initially suspected someone close to her. Her male friend engaged in small talk with the “clone account” owner, who fabricated a lie that he knew Xiaoxiao from high school and had relations in her dormitory, using vulgar language, fantasizing, and boasting. The turning point was a photo he sent. Using image recognition, she linked it to her previous suspicion—Li Yongping.
On July 10, the day after reporting, she was almost certain that Li Yongping, who secretly stole and forged her photos, was the culprit. Her life was completely disrupted: she urgently sought evidence of Li Yongping’s crimes, while also suffering verbal attacks from other harassers. Her personal information was continuously spread by Li Yongping; some fake accounts with insulting words and personal details flooded her private messages. She felt terrible—unable to eat well or sleep steadily, developing mouth ulcers. On July 11, the third day after reporting, she received a message from Li Yongping. It was just casual chatting with no substantive content. Over the next month, this beast intensified his harassment, almost three times a week initiating conversations, wildly liking her previous photos, and spreading them in male criminal groups on Telegram. With her friends’ help, before the criminal’s true nature was exposed, she continued to outsmart him, collecting evidence that the person stealing her photos online and using AI to generate pornographic images was Li Yongping. She submitted this evidence to the police, but the police only filed a case for “spreading obscene materials.” Spreading obscene materials, depending on the severity, can be a public security violation or a criminal offense. Ultimately, she received only an administrative penalty decision for a public security case.
On August 20, Xiaoxiao received another police notice: Li Yongping was detained for only 10 days. Administrative detention is not a criminal offense; even with the heinous harm to real women, under the protection of feudal reactionary patriarchy in Zhongxiu, he paid only a trivial “price” of 10 days detention. More infuriating and tragic is that Xiaoxiao is one of the rare victims in China who has successfully defended her rights. Related bourgeois media commented: “In hindsight, Xiaoxiao’s successful rights protection is, to some extent, an accidental phenomenon that is hard to replicate.”
After Li Yongping’s 10-day administrative detention ended on August 30, Xiaoxiao also paid attention to his movements—by October and November, his reckless misconduct continued unabated, with no change. He only changed his nickname and avatar, deleted her edited videos, and stopped posting photos in groups, instead using text to guide other members to private chat. On November 9, she reported again, but faced the same dilemma as the first time—uncertain of the account owner’s identity, she needed to provide evidence to prove it. In such cases, victims are usually relied upon to collect evidence, but police generally do not intervene. This time, she hired a lawyer and was preparing to initiate civil litigation.
According to reports, in early October, three months after the incident, more than 130 people had joined the victim’s group, where women’s information could be bought for 50 yuan, and 2-minute AI-generated porn videos could also be exchanged for 50 yuan. An account with a red cartoon avatar had many “client orders,” even requiring queues; after payment, it took about 10 working days for the content to be delivered online. The “face swap” channel on the homepage had 29,000 active monthly users. Zhongxiu still tacitly allowed such groups to exist, and the criminals to continue increasing, turning a blind eye.
What makes Xiaoxiao most sad is that she completed all the procedures required in the legal process of feudal society but still failed to stop the evil. The harm never stopped; instead, it became more covert and insidious. Later, she was diagnosed with anxiety and depression. “If leaking privacy doesn’t count as harm, do I have to rush home and hold a knife to my neck to be truly harmed?” she couldn’t understand why the perpetrator only needed to move a finger to cause harm, while the victim had to bear the cost herself. For women who are still fighting for rights after being sexually assaulted or violently attacked, they must also contend with the long-term fear of retaliation from male offenders and the hopelessness of their rights protection. Xiaoxiao’s experience is far from unique. An bourgeois lawyer stated that Deepfake incidents are now very common; she receives dozens of inquiries from perpetrators or victims each year. However, only one or two cases annually result in criminal convictions, and most cases involve charges of “insult and defamation” or “spreading obscene materials.” In her cases, most offenders are charged with spreading obscene materials, with a maximum sentence of two years. If they profit from it, it becomes a different crime—“profit-driven dissemination of obscene materials,” which can carry life imprisonment.
This is the so-called “fairness and justice” of Zhongxiu’s legal system! The state is a state of the ruling class; Zhongxiu’s laws and procedures are naturally limited within frameworks that serve the interests of the ruling class. Even if these male offenders forge real women’s pornographic images, in the dark corners of the internet, they indulge in fantasizing and humiliating victims like Xiaoxiao along with other perverts, inflicting deep psychological torment. Yet, in order to uphold patriarchy, Zhongxiu continues to maintain systemic discrimination and oppression against women, promotes hierarchy, allies with small-bourgeois rightists like Li Yongping, and consolidates capitalism. The maximum penalty is only two years (if not for profit), and successful rights protection cases are rare, leaving victims with no way out—only lamenting why, despite following legal procedures and exhausting all efforts, they cannot escape oppression.
Bourgeois elements try every means to defend Li Yongping and capitalism. Some reactionary patriarchal vested interests romanticize Li Yongping, claiming he spent money and effort pursuing Xiaoxiao but was rejected, making him a “victim,” including Li Yongping himself. In reality, this logic completely reduces women to commodities bought and sold; they believe that if they spend money, they must buy the woman, the high-priced commodity. The motivation is vile, the behavior hypocritical. Later, Li Yongping stole victims’ photos and vented his lust online, which is even more disgusting. Some offenders act impulsively without any purpose. The bourgeois lawyer in this report also strongly defends the feudal society and police’s inaction in helping victims gather evidence. She attributes whether cases can be investigated and evidence collected to technology, exaggerating Telegram’s secrecy, “the entire text turns into a fog and quickly disappears,” and downplays the subjective initiative of class-conscious people, romanticizing police inaction as a matter of weighing pros and cons. She asks, “For example, X (original Twitter), needs to be investigated in the US, is it worth for the state to initiate international cooperation for this case?” Her answer is naturally no. But is it really just “this case”? Daily, thousands of criminals are active in Telegram’s porn groups, with countless victims’ photos being uploaded en masse. Why isn’t the victim’s experience, like Xiaoxiao’s, worth the state’s international cooperation? Moreover, is it not absurd to compare the “cost” of collecting evidence with the suffering of a victim? Xiaoxiao, who has no “public authority” to access personal information, can still collect evidence with friends’ help, let alone the police—Zhongxiu police just don’t want to do it, after all, they are servants of the bourgeoisie, obeying their master’s orders!
Deepfake technology, in the hands of bourgeois and reactionary criminals, only becomes a weapon against the oppressed; in the capitalist society ruled by wolves, no matter how strong the investigation skills are, if the investigation violates bourgeois interests, it will be abandoned. We must see the root cause of all these inequalities—the entire capitalist system!
［
］被AI换脸后，她们经历了中国版“N号房”_凤凰网
8 Likes
Illegal activities that infringe on personal privacy online and cause mental distress are all difficult to handle effectively. As long as bad actors hide behind the internet, they remain unscrupulous.
1 Like
There are some people online who use opposition to extreme feminism to promote decayed patriarchal and male-dominated ideas, and men who have seen some extreme feminist rhetoric can easily be led astray. Therefore, extreme feminism is meant to drag women into an abyss, and I don’t even understand what rights these extreme “feminists” are fighting for; they are just further weakening women and spreading hatred in the process. It is said to be related to foreign bourgeois forces.
Replying to this here indeed seems inappropriate. The topic is different.