輕輕地揮一揮手
居美國華盛頓, 就職政府部門, 花甲年歲, 天天等下班, 月月等薪水, 年年等退休.
正文
轉載者注: 我也不相信, 不能用編<白毛女>和<收租院>的方式來反對文革, 文革是不好, 但也得實事求是, 隨口亂說就沒勁了. 以下全是轉載的.
感謝翻譯的網友，原文由署名“lin”等讀者以英文發表
★我不相信她的故事
作為一個中國人，我經曆過那個時代。我和她有著類似的家庭，教育背景，我們都在童年經曆了文化大革命的磨難。我認為她大多數（如果不是全部的）在中國的經曆是偽造的，想象的，過度誇大和故意誤導。如果一個人隻看了媒體對她書的報道，他/她也許會認為媒體不過選取了書裏轟動性的部分再誇張一點好幫助她賣書。不是的，不是這樣的。她整本書從頭到尾都是撒謊，即使是那些細小的細節也不例外。我很驚奇她夠膽敢在如此受公眾矚目的書裏撒這麽明顯的謊言。這裏是一些那個時期中國的社會和文化背景：在傳統中國儒家社會裏，孩子被認為是父母的財產。父母對孩子有著絕對的權利，包括虐待和賣孩子的權力。
自從毛領導的共產黨奪取政權之後，父母不能賣孩子了，但是其他的權力仍然被尊重，包括養父母對孩子的權力（如果過程合法且文件完整）。文化大革命沒有改變這些。在文革期間，很多政府官員，高校老師，教授們和知識分子被迫害和受監禁。我的父母就是那些人中的一員，就像傅蘋父母一樣（如果她說的是真的話）。曾經有這麽一段時間我父母都處於監禁中，但他們安排親朋好友照顧我，我有的時候也住在一個寄宿學校。
我很多親戚和很多類似處境的人們的孩子和我都有差不多的經曆。我從未聽說過哪家孩子被政府帶走，這簡直匪夷所思。沒人，包括政府可以把別人的孩子帶走。沒有什麽社會福利機構能幹這活或者收容這樣的孩子。這樣的機構必然要花錢，中國那時候很窮，孩子們是個負擔。 紅衛兵是“革命家”，他們忙著批判和迫害像我父母（或者傅蘋女士父母）這樣的人，或者忙著內鬥。他們不在乎小孩，更沒興趣照顧小孩。像我們這樣的小孩無人過問，雖然在學校和社會上常受歧視。文革之後，很多中國人寫文章回憶文革中的經曆，大多數故事多多少少和我的經曆差不多，我從未聽說過傅蘋女士書中所說的兒童集中營。
傅蘋女士作為一個兒童的經曆聽上去不可能，和那個時候的很多事情也對不上。中國的性文化背景和西方完全不同。在八十年代之前，中國在性方麵非常保守。年輕人在遇到要結婚的對象之前對性非常無知，一般也沒什麽性經驗。人民甚至也不談論或者拿性話題開玩笑。年輕人的強奸事件非常少見，特別是在城市裏，幾十年前強奸可是非常嚴重的罪行。年輕人強奸或者性侵犯兒童更為罕見。集團輪奸聞所未聞。我在二十多年在中國的生活中，唯一一次聽說的輪奸時間是八十年代外國人幹的。紅衛兵是“革命者”，不是街頭混混或者強奸犯，他們也許會打人迫害別人，但是他們不強奸。
在媒體采訪裏，她說她10歲的時候被一群年輕的紅衛兵輪奸（在書裏她說被一群十幾歲的男孩在大學校園裏光天化日之下輪奸），因為她試圖去救她的小妹妹，這簡直是無法想像。如此有違於中國的性文化，中國人的思維方式，特別是不符合紅衛兵的思維和行為方式。大多數地方的學校在1968年重新開門，即使是對我這種父母被迫害的孩子們來說也是免費的。南京是中國最大的城市之一，我實在想象不出傅蘋為什麽無法去學校。而且在七十年代，大多數高中畢業生必須被“上山下鄉”，留在城市很難。七十年代工廠的工作被認為是很好的工作很難得到。很多人得行賄或者利用關係才能給他們的孩子找到一份工廠裏的工廠。
工廠不接受未畢業的孩子做工。學校倒是可能會組織孩子去工廠實習積累經驗，我初中就做過。傅蘋“在中國最大的城市之一裏因為在工廠裏做工因而不能去學校”的故事完全不可能是真的。中國的大學在1966年和1976年之間沒有招收任何高中畢業生。文革之後第一次高考在1977年。任何一個在1966年1976年之間畢業的高中生都可以參加考試。為了那幾個有限的大學席位的競爭可以說是白熱化。八十年代早期之後隻有應屆畢業生才能參加高考，隻有4%的考生才能進高校。所以你可以想象77年高考的競爭能有多激烈，複習材料和書籍非常稀缺，既沒被父母撫養也沒上過學的傅蘋女士能在1977年考進大學，她真的是一個超人。所以的中國大學生得上四年大學英語，超人傅蘋女士在畢業之後一年到美國的時候隻會說三個詞：謝謝，你好，幫助。饒了我吧。
中國的“獨生子女”政策在1980年晚些時候才正式開始。那年傅蘋女士不過是大三學生。作為一個在城裏長大的孩子，居然想起來要把一個因為政府剛剛實施的政策而導致在鄉村殺死女嬰的問題作為畢業論文，聽起來不大可能。中國的“獨生子女“政策和強迫墮胎問題直到九十年代初才引起國際社會的注意。在文化大革命之後，中國政府也不大因為政治原因逮捕人了，除了一些個例。八十年代早期我的一些大學同學做了些更有影響和更不能為政府接受的事情，也不過有些麻煩，也沒有被逮捕或者監禁。 八十年代中國仍然很窮。超聲波是很少見，很昂貴的醫療儀器。即使在北京或者上海最好的醫院裏，超聲波檢查也不是孕婦常做的檢查。
人們也不知道超聲波檢查可以鑒別胎兒性別。我不知道傅蘋女士如何能在1980-1981年發現農村裏存在預知胎兒性別而強迫墮胎女嬰的現象的。而且八十年代初期中美還處於蜜月中。那時候中國可不像今天這麽被批評和被妖魔化。中美兩國實際上某種聯盟共同對抗蘇聯。直到九十年代之前中國也不大驅逐異見人士。即使是在驅逐之前，兩國政府往往進行緊張的談判。美國可不什麽接受什麽無名之輩，美國隻接受著名的異見人士。傅蘋女士隻不過是個無名之輩，也沒人聽說過她。她1982年春天從大學畢業，1983年來美（有的報道說1982年）。在這短短的一年裏，她的畢業論文登在媒體上，被國內外所關注（我當時就在中國，我從未聽說過這個故事），她被中國政府監禁，被驅逐到美國。無論中國還是美國政府都沒這麽高效率。
中國媒體在八十年代初更無什麽自由來報道這種新聞，就是不可能。所以整個因為畢業論文被監禁驅逐到美國的故事與那個時代一切因素抵觸。兒童士兵。我不知道傅蘋所在的這個“兒童士兵”是什麽。在中國沒有所謂的“兒童士兵”。文革期間，軍隊士兵擁有最高的社會等級，收入也相對較高。即使是高中生參軍也很難。唯一我所知道的“兒童士兵”是那些因為有特殊的“孩子”：比如說唱歌，跳舞，演奏樂器或者表演。他們是作為文藝兵參軍的，他們在部隊文藝部門裏學習，被培訓。那些孩子被認為極其幸運，多有人都羨慕他們。如果我們能從這本書裏學習到任何東西，那就是一個人能如此明目張膽地撒謊。也許這也是她在美國成功的秘訣。無辜的美國民眾被迫通過這些謊言來了解中國，文革和中國人民實在是太糟糕了。
補充說明我最初的讀者評論寫於一月二十二日，在我聽了NPR的新聞之後。評論基於她的維基頁麵，NPR和其它媒體對她書的報道和一些讀者在亞馬遜上對她書的評價。我上個星期讀了她的書，在我寫了最初的評論之後。我附近的圖書館裏有這本書。附近一家BN（巴諾）書店把她的書放在顯著的位置（我一毛錢也不會花在她書上），看起來這本書馬上就要成為最暢銷書的樣子。今天我打電話給BN（巴諾）書店建議他們把該書撤出書架。他們不應當把徹頭徹底的謊言以二十七點九五美元賣給不明的顧客。
我敦促大家都采取同樣的行動。 傅蘋本人在我的讀者評論上留言希望和我直接通過電子郵件對話。她認為她可以回答大多數我的問題。我對傅蘋女士的建議是：她應當對大眾回答這些問題，要麽在亞馬遜的作者領域或者其他辦法。和我私下交流毫無意義。這本書對我而言讀起來非常困難，因為這本書從頭到尾每頁都是徹頭徹底的謊言。以下是三個最大的謊言僅見於書中：在書的一開始，她聲稱1966年的一天，紅衛兵到她父母上海的家中命令她的兄弟們和他們走。她的兄弟們被“上山下鄉”（她的原話）。任何知道那段中國曆史的人都知道把年輕人送去上山下鄉是從1969年開始，而不是1966年，是毛在1968年12月份鼓勵年輕人去農村接受再教育。紅衛兵把人從家裏搞出來打發到農村去不是年輕人被送到農村去的途徑。
她聲稱，1982年在宣布“獨生子女”政策之後，她學校的官員強迫所有女學生交出衛生護墊以檢查她們的月經期。當一些女孩把她們朋友的衛生護墊交出去之後，官員用手指插入“我們的陰道”檢查是否有出血。（是的，她用了“我們”一詞）。我不禁想，什麽人有這麽變態的心理來編造這樣離譜的謠言。並且她也許忘了1982年的時候市場上可沒有衛生護墊賣，城市裏的婦女使用衛生紙來對付月經。她說1982年秋季她在校園裏漫步準備畢業（她忘記了77年高考的人應當82年春天就畢業了，78年高考的人才是82年秋季畢業）。一個人偷偷接近她，拿一個黑頭套套在她頭上，把她帶到未知的場所將她逮捕。政府為啥要這麽秘密地逮捕她？
很多人回應我的讀者評論給我發了一張她年輕時照片的鏈接，鏈接來自於推銷她和她的公司的網頁。在那張照片了，傅蘋和一群小孩戴著紅衛兵袖章站在紅衛兵旗幟下（意味著他們都是紅衛兵）。但傅蘋聲稱他們是”文革期間被迫生活在政府宿舍裏的小孩“。亞馬遜的顧客Z Li回應了我的讀者評論，提供了一個傅蘋2010接收NPR采訪的鏈接。在那個采訪裏，幾乎每個從她嘴裏說出關於中國的話都是離譜的謊言。
★用中國人的苦難斂財
“彎而不折”，作為一本扭曲事實的圖書的名稱真是再合適不過了！你可以扭曲事實，但你永遠無法破壞真相。我和這裏的所有讀者一樣厭惡文革，但是傅萍在文革問題上的扭曲和捏造有些太過分，她分明就是在用自己同胞的苦難來聚斂錢財。傅萍她本人就是一個紅衛兵！她自己就在文革中迫害過他人！現在她還說自己曾經被紅衛兵迫害施暴？！她還不如說一些納粹分子被自己的納粹同僚迫害過……
★她絕對是一個騙子
這本書很顯然充滿了謊言，隻有那些不懂中文並且不了解中國現代史的人才會相信書中所說的故事。有的謊言甚至做一下簡單的推理計算就可以被揭穿：1，傅女士是1958年出生，文革是在1966年到1976年，這麽小的孩子是不可能被送去勞改的。2， 傅女士稱自己在1977年考入了蘇州大學。文革之後的第一次高考是在1977年，在那時政治審查是必須的，如果她是在勞改，她絕對不可能通過審查。更別說蘇州大學是在1982年才建立起來的，她怎麽可能1977年的時候就過去讀書了？
★很遺憾我們今天有互聯網了
傅萍說的很好，“我寫書不是因為現在的成就，而是因為曾經的默默無聞。”對於那個根本不存在的“默默無聞”的人來說，她甚至可以把自己寫成上帝。
★不要浪費自己的時間了
我要對那些還沒有看過這本書的人說，不要浪費時間看這本書，就像很多人說的那樣，這本書充滿了肮髒的謊言。我同時要對那些寫過書評的人說，不要浪費時間評論這本書了，我了解你們想要揭穿那些赤裸裸的謊言的心情。畢竟，任何一個有基本推理能力的人類都可以輕易發現他們。不過對於那些隻願意相信他們相信的“真相”的人來說，你也無法改變他們對於中國的想法。不幸的是後者還是占大多數。他們不在乎你在書評中寫了什麽，他們會指控你為紅色中國的間諜，五毛黨，或者其他什麽。他們也許還會說，“可憐的人，被共產主義洗腦了”。但是我們知道真正被洗腦的是誰。
★她的經曆都是捏造的
幾年前我曾經看過一篇關於她的報道，我當時就很憤怒，因為她自己講述的在中國的經曆聽上去特別虛假。現在她又寫了一本書來欺騙更多的人麽？這是一個真實的世界，不是什麽好萊塢電影。如果你想要通過編造故事和扭曲事實來增加銷量，就不要說這是一本自傳。
★滿是謊言
我自己經曆過文革，我父親在文革中還被拘捕過。但是我知道事實並不是作者書中所描述的那樣，這些故事顯然都是捏造的。有很多網友已經提出了很好的質疑，我在這裏就不再重複了。我隻希望傅萍可以給我們一個解釋。
★讓我感到很惡心
我不想再指出書中那些瘋狂又顯而易見的謊言。我隻是想問為什麽這種書能被出版，這讓些相似的謊言被一遍一遍地重複？散布有關中國的謊言已經成了這個國家媒體的一種習慣了。
★誰是傻子？
毫無疑問傅萍是在騙人，但是誰被她騙到了呢？出版社？《福布斯》雜誌？在電視上采訪她的主持人？都不是，這些人都在幫助她去欺騙別人。他們都應該感到羞恥！
★想要了解中國的近代史麽？我推薦《上海生死劫》
我研究中國近代曆史已經超過20年了。正如其他讀者指出的那樣，傅萍書中很多關於自己中國生活的細節都經不住事實的考證。比如說她稱自己被中國政府驅逐的地方就不可能是真的，因為不管是過去還是現在，隻有在國際上有知名度的人權活動家才有可能被驅逐到西方世界。美國政府不可能接受所有被中國驅逐的人。對於一個年輕的大學畢業生來說，想去美國通常的做法是在美國大使館外等上幾個小時或者整個晚上來申請簽證。有很多人到了美國之後就開始編造各種聳人聽聞的到美國尋找政治庇護的故事。中國文革時期的曆史被很完整得記錄了下來，有眾多的回憶錄和存檔資料，其中的大部分都是可信的，你可以拿他們和現存的文件做校對。對於不太了解中國近代史的讀者，我推薦鄭念的《上海生死劫》（Life and Death in Shanghai），這是作者的一本回憶錄，用英文寫的，亞馬遜上麵也可以買到.
以下為原文：
As a Chinese, I lived through that period of time in China. I have similar family and educational background as hers and suffered during Culture Revolution as a child. I think her experiences in China mostly, if not all, are fabricated, imagined, overly exaggerated or deliberately miss leading.
If one just read the media reports about her book, he/she may think that media might just pick the sensational parts of the book and exaggerated a little bit to help her to sell the book. No, it is not the case. She lied from very beginning to the end in the book, even on the small detailed events. I am amazed by her audacity of telling so many blatant lies in such a well publicized book.
Here are some of the social and culture background of that period of time in China:
1. In traditional Confucius Chinese culture, children were considered as property of their parents. Parents had absolute rights to their children, including the rights to abuse or sell their kids. Since Mao's communists took over the power of China, parents can't sell their kids anymore, but all other rights were respected, including the rights of adopted parents (if the adoptions were legal and paper work complete). Culture Revolution didn't change any of that.
During Culture Revolution, many government officials, college teachers and professors, and intellectuals were persecuted or locked up. My parents were among those people just like Ping Fu's parents(if her claims are true). There were a period of time that both of my parents were locked up. My parents arranged me to be taken care by relatives, family friend or to live in a boarding child care center. Many of my relatives' children and other people in similar situation all had similar experiences as me. I had never heard of any kids being taken away by authorities, it is just against way of thinking. No one, including government could take people's children away. There isn't such agency to do that kind of job and no facility for that kind of children. That would cost money too and China was very poor at that time, children were burdens.
Red Guard were "revolutionists", they were busy criticizing and persecuting people like my parents (or Ping's parents), or fighting each other. They didn't care about little kids, and didn't interested in taking care of children. Kids like us were left alone, although often were discriminated in schools and in society in general. After Culture Revolution ended, Many people in China wrote about their experiences during that time. All of those stories regarding kids that I've read of were more or less similar to mine, I had never heard of or read about any camp like what Ping wrote in her book, nothing close to what she told. Ping's story as a child just sounds impossible and did not add up with many things in that time.
2. The culture on sex in China have been completely different from the West. China was extremely conservative on sex before 80's. Young people were very ignorant about sex and usually didn't have any sexual experiences before they met the person they would marry. People don't even talk or joke about sex. Rape committed by young men was rare at that time, especially in cities. Rape was a very serious crime in China and punishment could be the death decades ago. Raping or molestation of little children by young people was even rarer. Gang rape was unheard of. In my whole 20+ year living in China, the only gang rape I had heard of were committed by foreigners in 80's.
Red Guard were "revolutionists", not street thugs or rapists, they might beat or persecute people, but not rape. Ping's claim that she was GANG raped by young Red Guards (as reported by many media. But in her book, she was rape by a bunch of young teen boys under broad day light at a university campus) at age 10 because she saved her little sister against their will is just so unimaginable, so against China's sexual culture and thinking, especially against Red Guards' way of thinking and behaving.
3. The schools were re-open in 1968 in most of the places, and were free, even for kids whose parents being persecuted like me. Najing is one of the biggest city in China. I just couldn't imagine the reason that Ping could not go to school. Besides, in 70's, most of high school graduates had to go to poor and rural countryside, there were very limited job for them in the cities. Factory jobs were considered very good jobs and extremely hard to get in 70's. Many people had to bribe or use their connection to land their kids a factory job. And factory don't accept child as employee or labor unless they finished their schooling. Schools may organize kids to work in factories for several weeks to get experiences though. I did that in middle school.
So Ping's story of working in the factory as a child and not be able to go to school in one of the biggest and most developed city in China is just not impossible to be true.
4. China's college didn't admit any high school graduates from 1966 to 1976. The first college entrance exam after Culture Revolution was held in 1977. Any person who graduated high school between 1966 and 1976 could take the exam. The competition for limited college seats was fierce. In early 80's, when only currently year high school graduates could take the college entrance exam, only 4% could get into college. So you can imagine how competitive to get into college in year 77. The study materials and books were very limited at that time. Unparented and unschooled Ping Fu could get into college in 1977, she must be a supper human.
5. All college students in China had to take 4 years of English classes. The supper human Ping Fu could only speak three phrases of English when she came to the US, one year after graduating from college: thank you, hello, and help. Give me a break.
6. China's One Child policy officially started in later year of 1980. At that year, Ping should be a college junior. For a person grew up in city to think of writing her college senior year graduation thesis about killing of baby girls in rural countryside because of a newly started government policy, it is just sounds impossible for me. China's one child policy and related abortion issue wasn't caught international attention until 90's. So, even if Ping Fu wrote something about that, I don't think that government cared. Beside, after Cultural Revolution, Chinese government don't arrest people for political reason anymore, except few rare cases. In early 80's, there were several students at my college did something politically more influential and considered much more unacceptable to the government than Ping's paper, they got some trouble but not arrested or detained.
In 80's, China was still very poor. Ultrasound was rare and expensive medical equipment. Ultrasound exam wasn't a routine exam for pregnant women even in the best hospitals in the biggest city like Shanghai or Beijing. People also didn't have the knowledge that ultrasound exam can tell the gender of the fetus. I don't know how Ping Fu could find that there were prevalent practice of forced abortions of young girl fetuses in poor rural China between 1980-1981, .
Besides, US and China were still in honey moon in early 80's. China wasn't demonized and criticized so much by the West like nowadays. Two countries were kind of allies against then Soviet Union. China didn't started the practice of deporting dissidents to US until 90's. And each time before the deporting, the two government had to negotiate extensively. US don't accept nobody, they only accept those famous dissents. Ping Fu was nobody and unheard of.
She graduated from college in Spring of 1982, came to the US in 1983(some media says in 1982). In this short one year or even less, her college graduation paper reached media, gained domestic and international media attention(I was in China at that time, never heard of that story), she was detained by Chinese government and then deported to the US. None of the US and Chinese government was that efficient. Chinese media wasn't that free to dig and report that kind of news at early 80's. This is just impossible.
So this whole episode of imprisonment because of a paper and deportation to the US is just contradict with everything in that period of time.
7，"Child soldier". I don't know what this "Child soldier" she was. In China, there was no "Child soldier". During Cultural Revolution, military soldiers and personnels had the highest social status and relatively better paid. It was hard for even high school graduates to join the army. The only "Child soldiers" that I knew of were kids with special talents, such as singing, dancing, playing music instruments, or acting. They were recruited by entertainment units of the military. They would study, be trained and taken care of in those military entertainment units. Those were considered extremely lucky kids and envied by every body.
If anything we can learn from this book, it probably would be the audacity a person could have to lie. May be that's the only secrete of her success in the US. It is too bad that innocent American people have to learn about China, Cultural Revolution and Chinese people through this kind of lies.
---------------
1/29
Afternotes:
1. I wrote my initial review on 1/22 after I heard news on NPR. The review were based on wikipedia page about her, NPR and several other media reports about the book, and first several customer reviews on amazon. I read the book last week after I wrote the review.
2. My local library has the book. A Barnes and Noble' retail store near my place puts the book in prominent place (I wouldn't spend a dime on lies). Looks like this book is on it way to the best seller lists
感謝翻譯的網友，原文由署名“lin”等讀者以英文發表
★我不相信她的故事
作為一個中國人，我經曆過那個時代。我和她有著類似的家庭，教育背景，我們都在童年經曆了文化大革命的磨難。我認為她大多數（如果不是全部的）在中國的經曆是偽造的，想象的，過度誇大和故意誤導。如果一個人隻看了媒體對她書的報道，他/她也許會認為媒體不過選取了書裏轟動性的部分再誇張一點好幫助她賣書。不是的，不是這樣的。她整本書從頭到尾都是撒謊，即使是那些細小的細節也不例外。我很驚奇她夠膽敢在如此受公眾矚目的書裏撒這麽明顯的謊言。這裏是一些那個時期中國的社會和文化背景：在傳統中國儒家社會裏，孩子被認為是父母的財產。父母對孩子有著絕對的權利，包括虐待和賣孩子的權力。
自從毛領導的共產黨奪取政權之後，父母不能賣孩子了，但是其他的權力仍然被尊重，包括養父母對孩子的權力（如果過程合法且文件完整）。文化大革命沒有改變這些。在文革期間，很多政府官員，高校老師，教授們和知識分子被迫害和受監禁。我的父母就是那些人中的一員，就像傅蘋父母一樣（如果她說的是真的話）。曾經有這麽一段時間我父母都處於監禁中，但他們安排親朋好友照顧我，我有的時候也住在一個寄宿學校。
我很多親戚和很多類似處境的人們的孩子和我都有差不多的經曆。我從未聽說過哪家孩子被政府帶走，這簡直匪夷所思。沒人，包括政府可以把別人的孩子帶走。沒有什麽社會福利機構能幹這活或者收容這樣的孩子。這樣的機構必然要花錢，中國那時候很窮，孩子們是個負擔。 紅衛兵是“革命家”，他們忙著批判和迫害像我父母（或者傅蘋女士父母）這樣的人，或者忙著內鬥。他們不在乎小孩，更沒興趣照顧小孩。像我們這樣的小孩無人過問，雖然在學校和社會上常受歧視。文革之後，很多中國人寫文章回憶文革中的經曆，大多數故事多多少少和我的經曆差不多，我從未聽說過傅蘋女士書中所說的兒童集中營。
傅蘋女士作為一個兒童的經曆聽上去不可能，和那個時候的很多事情也對不上。中國的性文化背景和西方完全不同。在八十年代之前，中國在性方麵非常保守。年輕人在遇到要結婚的對象之前對性非常無知，一般也沒什麽性經驗。人民甚至也不談論或者拿性話題開玩笑。年輕人的強奸事件非常少見，特別是在城市裏，幾十年前強奸可是非常嚴重的罪行。年輕人強奸或者性侵犯兒童更為罕見。集團輪奸聞所未聞。我在二十多年在中國的生活中，唯一一次聽說的輪奸時間是八十年代外國人幹的。紅衛兵是“革命者”，不是街頭混混或者強奸犯，他們也許會打人迫害別人，但是他們不強奸。
在媒體采訪裏，她說她10歲的時候被一群年輕的紅衛兵輪奸（在書裏她說被一群十幾歲的男孩在大學校園裏光天化日之下輪奸），因為她試圖去救她的小妹妹，這簡直是無法想像。如此有違於中國的性文化，中國人的思維方式，特別是不符合紅衛兵的思維和行為方式。大多數地方的學校在1968年重新開門，即使是對我這種父母被迫害的孩子們來說也是免費的。南京是中國最大的城市之一，我實在想象不出傅蘋為什麽無法去學校。而且在七十年代，大多數高中畢業生必須被“上山下鄉”，留在城市很難。七十年代工廠的工作被認為是很好的工作很難得到。很多人得行賄或者利用關係才能給他們的孩子找到一份工廠裏的工廠。
工廠不接受未畢業的孩子做工。學校倒是可能會組織孩子去工廠實習積累經驗，我初中就做過。傅蘋“在中國最大的城市之一裏因為在工廠裏做工因而不能去學校”的故事完全不可能是真的。中國的大學在1966年和1976年之間沒有招收任何高中畢業生。文革之後第一次高考在1977年。任何一個在1966年1976年之間畢業的高中生都可以參加考試。為了那幾個有限的大學席位的競爭可以說是白熱化。八十年代早期之後隻有應屆畢業生才能參加高考，隻有4%的考生才能進高校。所以你可以想象77年高考的競爭能有多激烈，複習材料和書籍非常稀缺，既沒被父母撫養也沒上過學的傅蘋女士能在1977年考進大學，她真的是一個超人。所以的中國大學生得上四年大學英語，超人傅蘋女士在畢業之後一年到美國的時候隻會說三個詞：謝謝，你好，幫助。饒了我吧。
中國的“獨生子女”政策在1980年晚些時候才正式開始。那年傅蘋女士不過是大三學生。作為一個在城裏長大的孩子，居然想起來要把一個因為政府剛剛實施的政策而導致在鄉村殺死女嬰的問題作為畢業論文，聽起來不大可能。中國的“獨生子女“政策和強迫墮胎問題直到九十年代初才引起國際社會的注意。在文化大革命之後，中國政府也不大因為政治原因逮捕人了，除了一些個例。八十年代早期我的一些大學同學做了些更有影響和更不能為政府接受的事情，也不過有些麻煩，也沒有被逮捕或者監禁。 八十年代中國仍然很窮。超聲波是很少見，很昂貴的醫療儀器。即使在北京或者上海最好的醫院裏，超聲波檢查也不是孕婦常做的檢查。
人們也不知道超聲波檢查可以鑒別胎兒性別。我不知道傅蘋女士如何能在1980-1981年發現農村裏存在預知胎兒性別而強迫墮胎女嬰的現象的。而且八十年代初期中美還處於蜜月中。那時候中國可不像今天這麽被批評和被妖魔化。中美兩國實際上某種聯盟共同對抗蘇聯。直到九十年代之前中國也不大驅逐異見人士。即使是在驅逐之前，兩國政府往往進行緊張的談判。美國可不什麽接受什麽無名之輩，美國隻接受著名的異見人士。傅蘋女士隻不過是個無名之輩，也沒人聽說過她。她1982年春天從大學畢業，1983年來美（有的報道說1982年）。在這短短的一年裏，她的畢業論文登在媒體上，被國內外所關注（我當時就在中國，我從未聽說過這個故事），她被中國政府監禁，被驅逐到美國。無論中國還是美國政府都沒這麽高效率。
中國媒體在八十年代初更無什麽自由來報道這種新聞，就是不可能。所以整個因為畢業論文被監禁驅逐到美國的故事與那個時代一切因素抵觸。兒童士兵。我不知道傅蘋所在的這個“兒童士兵”是什麽。在中國沒有所謂的“兒童士兵”。文革期間，軍隊士兵擁有最高的社會等級，收入也相對較高。即使是高中生參軍也很難。唯一我所知道的“兒童士兵”是那些因為有特殊的“孩子”：比如說唱歌，跳舞，演奏樂器或者表演。他們是作為文藝兵參軍的，他們在部隊文藝部門裏學習，被培訓。那些孩子被認為極其幸運，多有人都羨慕他們。如果我們能從這本書裏學習到任何東西，那就是一個人能如此明目張膽地撒謊。也許這也是她在美國成功的秘訣。無辜的美國民眾被迫通過這些謊言來了解中國，文革和中國人民實在是太糟糕了。
補充說明我最初的讀者評論寫於一月二十二日，在我聽了NPR的新聞之後。評論基於她的維基頁麵，NPR和其它媒體對她書的報道和一些讀者在亞馬遜上對她書的評價。我上個星期讀了她的書，在我寫了最初的評論之後。我附近的圖書館裏有這本書。附近一家BN（巴諾）書店把她的書放在顯著的位置（我一毛錢也不會花在她書上），看起來這本書馬上就要成為最暢銷書的樣子。今天我打電話給BN（巴諾）書店建議他們把該書撤出書架。他們不應當把徹頭徹底的謊言以二十七點九五美元賣給不明的顧客。
我敦促大家都采取同樣的行動。 傅蘋本人在我的讀者評論上留言希望和我直接通過電子郵件對話。她認為她可以回答大多數我的問題。我對傅蘋女士的建議是：她應當對大眾回答這些問題，要麽在亞馬遜的作者領域或者其他辦法。和我私下交流毫無意義。這本書對我而言讀起來非常困難，因為這本書從頭到尾每頁都是徹頭徹底的謊言。以下是三個最大的謊言僅見於書中：在書的一開始，她聲稱1966年的一天，紅衛兵到她父母上海的家中命令她的兄弟們和他們走。她的兄弟們被“上山下鄉”（她的原話）。任何知道那段中國曆史的人都知道把年輕人送去上山下鄉是從1969年開始，而不是1966年，是毛在1968年12月份鼓勵年輕人去農村接受再教育。紅衛兵把人從家裏搞出來打發到農村去不是年輕人被送到農村去的途徑。
她聲稱，1982年在宣布“獨生子女”政策之後，她學校的官員強迫所有女學生交出衛生護墊以檢查她們的月經期。當一些女孩把她們朋友的衛生護墊交出去之後，官員用手指插入“我們的陰道”檢查是否有出血。（是的，她用了“我們”一詞）。我不禁想，什麽人有這麽變態的心理來編造這樣離譜的謠言。並且她也許忘了1982年的時候市場上可沒有衛生護墊賣，城市裏的婦女使用衛生紙來對付月經。她說1982年秋季她在校園裏漫步準備畢業（她忘記了77年高考的人應當82年春天就畢業了，78年高考的人才是82年秋季畢業）。一個人偷偷接近她，拿一個黑頭套套在她頭上，把她帶到未知的場所將她逮捕。政府為啥要這麽秘密地逮捕她？
很多人回應我的讀者評論給我發了一張她年輕時照片的鏈接，鏈接來自於推銷她和她的公司的網頁。在那張照片了，傅蘋和一群小孩戴著紅衛兵袖章站在紅衛兵旗幟下（意味著他們都是紅衛兵）。但傅蘋聲稱他們是”文革期間被迫生活在政府宿舍裏的小孩“。亞馬遜的顧客Z Li回應了我的讀者評論，提供了一個傅蘋2010接收NPR采訪的鏈接。在那個采訪裏，幾乎每個從她嘴裏說出關於中國的話都是離譜的謊言。
★用中國人的苦難斂財
“彎而不折”，作為一本扭曲事實的圖書的名稱真是再合適不過了！你可以扭曲事實，但你永遠無法破壞真相。我和這裏的所有讀者一樣厭惡文革，但是傅萍在文革問題上的扭曲和捏造有些太過分，她分明就是在用自己同胞的苦難來聚斂錢財。傅萍她本人就是一個紅衛兵！她自己就在文革中迫害過他人！現在她還說自己曾經被紅衛兵迫害施暴？！她還不如說一些納粹分子被自己的納粹同僚迫害過……
★她絕對是一個騙子
這本書很顯然充滿了謊言，隻有那些不懂中文並且不了解中國現代史的人才會相信書中所說的故事。有的謊言甚至做一下簡單的推理計算就可以被揭穿：1，傅女士是1958年出生，文革是在1966年到1976年，這麽小的孩子是不可能被送去勞改的。2， 傅女士稱自己在1977年考入了蘇州大學。文革之後的第一次高考是在1977年，在那時政治審查是必須的，如果她是在勞改，她絕對不可能通過審查。更別說蘇州大學是在1982年才建立起來的，她怎麽可能1977年的時候就過去讀書了？
★很遺憾我們今天有互聯網了
傅萍說的很好，“我寫書不是因為現在的成就，而是因為曾經的默默無聞。”對於那個根本不存在的“默默無聞”的人來說，她甚至可以把自己寫成上帝。
★不要浪費自己的時間了
我要對那些還沒有看過這本書的人說，不要浪費時間看這本書，就像很多人說的那樣，這本書充滿了肮髒的謊言。我同時要對那些寫過書評的人說，不要浪費時間評論這本書了，我了解你們想要揭穿那些赤裸裸的謊言的心情。畢竟，任何一個有基本推理能力的人類都可以輕易發現他們。不過對於那些隻願意相信他們相信的“真相”的人來說，你也無法改變他們對於中國的想法。不幸的是後者還是占大多數。他們不在乎你在書評中寫了什麽，他們會指控你為紅色中國的間諜，五毛黨，或者其他什麽。他們也許還會說，“可憐的人，被共產主義洗腦了”。但是我們知道真正被洗腦的是誰。
★她的經曆都是捏造的
幾年前我曾經看過一篇關於她的報道，我當時就很憤怒，因為她自己講述的在中國的經曆聽上去特別虛假。現在她又寫了一本書來欺騙更多的人麽？這是一個真實的世界，不是什麽好萊塢電影。如果你想要通過編造故事和扭曲事實來增加銷量，就不要說這是一本自傳。
★滿是謊言
我自己經曆過文革，我父親在文革中還被拘捕過。但是我知道事實並不是作者書中所描述的那樣，這些故事顯然都是捏造的。有很多網友已經提出了很好的質疑，我在這裏就不再重複了。我隻希望傅萍可以給我們一個解釋。
★讓我感到很惡心
我不想再指出書中那些瘋狂又顯而易見的謊言。我隻是想問為什麽這種書能被出版，這讓些相似的謊言被一遍一遍地重複？散布有關中國的謊言已經成了這個國家媒體的一種習慣了。
★誰是傻子？
毫無疑問傅萍是在騙人，但是誰被她騙到了呢？出版社？《福布斯》雜誌？在電視上采訪她的主持人？都不是，這些人都在幫助她去欺騙別人。他們都應該感到羞恥！
★想要了解中國的近代史麽？我推薦《上海生死劫》
我研究中國近代曆史已經超過20年了。正如其他讀者指出的那樣，傅萍書中很多關於自己中國生活的細節都經不住事實的考證。比如說她稱自己被中國政府驅逐的地方就不可能是真的，因為不管是過去還是現在，隻有在國際上有知名度的人權活動家才有可能被驅逐到西方世界。美國政府不可能接受所有被中國驅逐的人。對於一個年輕的大學畢業生來說，想去美國通常的做法是在美國大使館外等上幾個小時或者整個晚上來申請簽證。有很多人到了美國之後就開始編造各種聳人聽聞的到美國尋找政治庇護的故事。中國文革時期的曆史被很完整得記錄了下來，有眾多的回憶錄和存檔資料，其中的大部分都是可信的，你可以拿他們和現存的文件做校對。對於不太了解中國近代史的讀者，我推薦鄭念的《上海生死劫》（Life and Death in Shanghai），這是作者的一本回憶錄，用英文寫的，亞馬遜上麵也可以買到.
以下為原文：
As a Chinese, I lived through that period of time in China. I have similar family and educational background as hers and suffered during Culture Revolution as a child. I think her experiences in China mostly, if not all, are fabricated, imagined, overly exaggerated or deliberately miss leading.
If one just read the media reports about her book, he/she may think that media might just pick the sensational parts of the book and exaggerated a little bit to help her to sell the book. No, it is not the case. She lied from very beginning to the end in the book, even on the small detailed events. I am amazed by her audacity of telling so many blatant lies in such a well publicized book.
Here are some of the social and culture background of that period of time in China:
1. In traditional Confucius Chinese culture, children were considered as property of their parents. Parents had absolute rights to their children, including the rights to abuse or sell their kids. Since Mao's communists took over the power of China, parents can't sell their kids anymore, but all other rights were respected, including the rights of adopted parents (if the adoptions were legal and paper work complete). Culture Revolution didn't change any of that.
During Culture Revolution, many government officials, college teachers and professors, and intellectuals were persecuted or locked up. My parents were among those people just like Ping Fu's parents(if her claims are true). There were a period of time that both of my parents were locked up. My parents arranged me to be taken care by relatives, family friend or to live in a boarding child care center. Many of my relatives' children and other people in similar situation all had similar experiences as me. I had never heard of any kids being taken away by authorities, it is just against way of thinking. No one, including government could take people's children away. There isn't such agency to do that kind of job and no facility for that kind of children. That would cost money too and China was very poor at that time, children were burdens.
Red Guard were "revolutionists", they were busy criticizing and persecuting people like my parents (or Ping's parents), or fighting each other. They didn't care about little kids, and didn't interested in taking care of children. Kids like us were left alone, although often were discriminated in schools and in society in general. After Culture Revolution ended, Many people in China wrote about their experiences during that time. All of those stories regarding kids that I've read of were more or less similar to mine, I had never heard of or read about any camp like what Ping wrote in her book, nothing close to what she told. Ping's story as a child just sounds impossible and did not add up with many things in that time.
2. The culture on sex in China have been completely different from the West. China was extremely conservative on sex before 80's. Young people were very ignorant about sex and usually didn't have any sexual experiences before they met the person they would marry. People don't even talk or joke about sex. Rape committed by young men was rare at that time, especially in cities. Rape was a very serious crime in China and punishment could be the death decades ago. Raping or molestation of little children by young people was even rarer. Gang rape was unheard of. In my whole 20+ year living in China, the only gang rape I had heard of were committed by foreigners in 80's.
Red Guard were "revolutionists", not street thugs or rapists, they might beat or persecute people, but not rape. Ping's claim that she was GANG raped by young Red Guards (as reported by many media. But in her book, she was rape by a bunch of young teen boys under broad day light at a university campus) at age 10 because she saved her little sister against their will is just so unimaginable, so against China's sexual culture and thinking, especially against Red Guards' way of thinking and behaving.
3. The schools were re-open in 1968 in most of the places, and were free, even for kids whose parents being persecuted like me. Najing is one of the biggest city in China. I just couldn't imagine the reason that Ping could not go to school. Besides, in 70's, most of high school graduates had to go to poor and rural countryside, there were very limited job for them in the cities. Factory jobs were considered very good jobs and extremely hard to get in 70's. Many people had to bribe or use their connection to land their kids a factory job. And factory don't accept child as employee or labor unless they finished their schooling. Schools may organize kids to work in factories for several weeks to get experiences though. I did that in middle school.
So Ping's story of working in the factory as a child and not be able to go to school in one of the biggest and most developed city in China is just not impossible to be true.
4. China's college didn't admit any high school graduates from 1966 to 1976. The first college entrance exam after Culture Revolution was held in 1977. Any person who graduated high school between 1966 and 1976 could take the exam. The competition for limited college seats was fierce. In early 80's, when only currently year high school graduates could take the college entrance exam, only 4% could get into college. So you can imagine how competitive to get into college in year 77. The study materials and books were very limited at that time. Unparented and unschooled Ping Fu could get into college in 1977, she must be a supper human.
5. All college students in China had to take 4 years of English classes. The supper human Ping Fu could only speak three phrases of English when she came to the US, one year after graduating from college: thank you, hello, and help. Give me a break.
6. China's One Child policy officially started in later year of 1980. At that year, Ping should be a college junior. For a person grew up in city to think of writing her college senior year graduation thesis about killing of baby girls in rural countryside because of a newly started government policy, it is just sounds impossible for me. China's one child policy and related abortion issue wasn't caught international attention until 90's. So, even if Ping Fu wrote something about that, I don't think that government cared. Beside, after Cultural Revolution, Chinese government don't arrest people for political reason anymore, except few rare cases. In early 80's, there were several students at my college did something politically more influential and considered much more unacceptable to the government than Ping's paper, they got some trouble but not arrested or detained.
In 80's, China was still very poor. Ultrasound was rare and expensive medical equipment. Ultrasound exam wasn't a routine exam for pregnant women even in the best hospitals in the biggest city like Shanghai or Beijing. People also didn't have the knowledge that ultrasound exam can tell the gender of the fetus. I don't know how Ping Fu could find that there were prevalent practice of forced abortions of young girl fetuses in poor rural China between 1980-1981, .
Besides, US and China were still in honey moon in early 80's. China wasn't demonized and criticized so much by the West like nowadays. Two countries were kind of allies against then Soviet Union. China didn't started the practice of deporting dissidents to US until 90's. And each time before the deporting, the two government had to negotiate extensively. US don't accept nobody, they only accept those famous dissents. Ping Fu was nobody and unheard of.
She graduated from college in Spring of 1982, came to the US in 1983(some media says in 1982). In this short one year or even less, her college graduation paper reached media, gained domestic and international media attention(I was in China at that time, never heard of that story), she was detained by Chinese government and then deported to the US. None of the US and Chinese government was that efficient. Chinese media wasn't that free to dig and report that kind of news at early 80's. This is just impossible.
So this whole episode of imprisonment because of a paper and deportation to the US is just contradict with everything in that period of time.
7，"Child soldier". I don't know what this "Child soldier" she was. In China, there was no "Child soldier". During Cultural Revolution, military soldiers and personnels had the highest social status and relatively better paid. It was hard for even high school graduates to join the army. The only "Child soldiers" that I knew of were kids with special talents, such as singing, dancing, playing music instruments, or acting. They were recruited by entertainment units of the military. They would study, be trained and taken care of in those military entertainment units. Those were considered extremely lucky kids and envied by every body.
If anything we can learn from this book, it probably would be the audacity a person could have to lie. May be that's the only secrete of her success in the US. It is too bad that innocent American people have to learn about China, Cultural Revolution and Chinese people through this kind of lies.
---------------
1/29
Afternotes:
1. I wrote my initial review on 1/22 after I heard news on NPR. The review were based on wikipedia page about her, NPR and several other media reports about the book, and first several customer reviews on amazon. I read the book last week after I wrote the review.
2. My local library has the book. A Barnes and Noble' retail store near my place puts the book in prominent place (I wouldn't spend a dime on lies). Looks like this book is on it way to the best seller lists
我也是從別的地方轉載來得, 無"版權".
文革時期北京西城區每隔一段日子就會有判刑的布告貼出來，那種罪刑最多？ 性犯罪！ 批鬥大會那種犯人多？ 性犯罪！
那個年齡段的多？ 年輕的多！ 北京那時候叫他們“gan 犯“
文革不是清教徒的時代，而是釋放了各種野心的瘋狂年代！
嚴重同意。
49年後慢慢叫江蘇省高等師範學院。
文革後該稱蘇州大學。不知為何沒改回東吳。
但是英文名改回Soochow，和49年前一樣。台灣應該還有東吳大學。
=============================================
Bravo
下麵網點有報道：
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2013/01/31/bend-not-break-author-ping-fu-responds-to-backlash/
撒謊者，終被謊言所吞噬。這應該是，大自然自古以來就存在著的規律。