三谈"李向东事件":平权会必须面对民众

广告管理员

广告管理员

本文的另外一位当事人、目前仍是李向东先生法律上的妻子Amanda女士

木然

我们曾邀请Amanda出席我们的节目，让Amanda亦能在同一平台上表达自己的看法，但可惜被Amanda婉拒了。

至强

最初由[广告管理员]发布
本文的另外一位当事人、目前仍是李向东先生法律上的妻子Amanda女士

本文的另外一位当事人、目前仍是李向东先生法律上的妻子Amanda女士

从吴女士面相看，她性格比较强，绝不是肯忍气吞声的人。颧骨高而面颊窄，是克夫之相。

俗话说清官难断家务事。这事老赵最好别掺和，若让吴女士跟你干上，保你不死也要脱层皮。

呵呵。

clara wei

台北夢

我认为你们及编辑部都是大做文章、不尊重加国法律、不尊重女性、不尊重法庭判决。可知家暴不只是身体暴力、它包心理、精神、和性虐待。李向东根本不是好人、有目共睹、他只利用你們拿回面子、而51.ca也是利用他来做文章、编辑更有扰乱加国公安伦理的行为。放下你粗暴、强奸妇女专严的所有动作吧！
李向东的说话全是他自己说、你胡亂地听、根本完全没有法律支持、要批就批中国贪汙的好了、加国是法治之地、你觉得有理由就去找律师吧、离婚吧。中国男人真要学尊重女性、男女平等、法治不是人治。大陆那一套在加国就是行不通、你有大陆纲男支持你也没用。不尊重法律、在法律面前都要滥骂不公平、你才是目中无法。不要以为这种滥用纲民的意识可以为你制造更多社会权力地位！我看到的是强词夺理、对公正的挑战、太低级了

Sedona

I too have listened to the programs on both Sundays.  Below is some of my thoughts:

1. Definition of abuse.

Abuse happens in a relationship with parties in different power hierarchy.  Those with power abuses the relationship and the less unfortunate vulnerable groups suffer.  The vulnerable groups include seniors, women, children, employees and racial minorities, for examples.

Those with power may also suffer from harm in a conflictual relationship, but the degree of suffer cannot match that by the vulnerable group.

In senior abuse, for instance, we know our old parents sometimes are extremely unreasonable, and we suffer.  So what!  We have the knowledge, skills and resources to deal with the harm caused by them to us.  When we abuse the seniors, they are too old to protect themselves.  The vulnerables need state intervention and protection.

The same principle extends to all vulnerable groups, which is the foundation of the anti-oppression framework.

2. Concept of violence

I was surprised one of the guests quoted an example that the man was angry and did not mean to harm his wife.  Violence comes in all forms: physical, verbal and emotional.  The theme is breach of trust.

Uttering death threat is not only violent behaviour  but also a breach of trust.  When we say "I'll kill you", we will be arrested by police and charged with criminal offense.  Your real motive doesn't matter.

We can't threaten to kill our colleagues at work; otherwise we will be terminated.  We can't threaten to kill other shoppers in the grocery store; otherwise, we will be arrested. We can't threaten to kill 木然, because we don't agree with him.

Why do we allow a man to threaten to kill his wife, at home? It is because he has power and control over his wife and his children, in a patriarchal society where males dominate.

木然 never talked about these definition of abuse and concept of violence on air.

Sedona

3. Sex by consent only

I was annoyed by 木然 when he talked about rape within a marriage.  He asked the question what if a man needs it.

Anyone who respects a female will agree a marriage does not entitle a man unlimited sex with (may I use the word against) a woman, without consent.

Sex without consent within or outside of a marriage is a violent behaviour and a criminal act.

I don't have no doubt 木然 still has his patriarchal DNA in his system.

4. Misleading legal information

木然 repeatedly in both programs challenged if it would be fair to a male that the male will be detained by police because of allegations by the female without visible evidence.

First, we don't want physical evidence, because once we find physical evidence, we may find a dead body.

Second, a man cannot be detained because of an allegation.  He must have been prosecuted. After the charges, he will be released on a bail or an undertaking.

In Canada, a defendant will not be allowed a bail because of 2 principles: flight risk and risk (to the nation, the community or the victims).  Lai, Gao and Zhang (the baby's mother) are not being detained.  Lai was detained for some time, because of flight risk, but since he is having his judicial review, the risk is minimal, so he is free.

Tony Lee was released for the first time, despite the knife in his hand.  He was detained the second time because he breached the no contact order, so he was considered a risk to the victims.  Mr. Lee did not respect the law, to begin with.

5. Separation is the most effective means to protect

A violent family needs help, which is a long process.  Separation cannot guarantee a happy ending, but allowing them to live together cannot do it either.

In a violent incident at home, at work or on the street, the first thing we have to do is to separate all parties.  They will seek help until they are ready for the reunion.

Putting them inside the same house and under the same roof without effective intervention is fostering fatal tragedy.

Sedona

Mr. Lee, I am sorry to tell you that you fit the profile of a male abuser in a scenario of violence against women, based on what you have written in 51 and talked at the radio.

Refer to the following links to see the picture of VAW and the profiles of a male abuser and the victims:

http://www.swc-cfc.gc.ca/pubs/0662331664/200212_0662331664_e.pdf


http://www.cma.ca/index.cfm/ci_id/10013255/la_id/1.htm

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/alt ... /facts_violence.pdf

http://www.pcawa.org/wap3.htm



As a man, I feel your behaviour exposing your daughter to the media disgusting.

zzyzx

“李向东事件”动物版

老猿

要是我说，木然、李向东都是猴子，你们可别跟我急呀。在这个版本里，大伙都是动物，谁也不是人。相比头脑简单的鸟类，说二位是猴子，还算是尊称呢。
话说从前有一座猴山。一说猴山，中国人全门清。因为中国所有的动物园都有猴子，其中的王权、父权、夫权，全在看客的眼皮底下。还因为，中国几千年的一段段封建社会，非常像座座猴山——王权、父权、夫权，跟猴子几乎是一个版本。——话说这座猴山，有几只特别的公猴子，又聪明，又有才，又崇尚个性，不喜欢封建文化，不喜欢等级和压迫，想从猴山跑出来，寻找自由的世界。先往近处看，发现猩猩、猿、狒狒，都跟猴山差不多，于是把头抬高，放眼鸟类的世界。这一看，就看上了西半球的鹬湖。
鹬是什么？——“鹬蚌相争”的主角。鹬其实远不如猴子聪明，可人家的优点却非常明显。鹬崇尚自由。没有鹬王，谁要想称王，别的鹬就展翅飞走了。而且，鹬最讲男女平等。你看，大杓鹬，雌雄同色，谁也不拿艳丽向对方献媚。青足鹬，夫妻可以“离异”，分手时父母双方各领一两个孩子。瓣蹼鹬，甚至“女尊男卑”，妈妈管产卵，爸爸承担全部孵卵、育雏的重任……
几个公猴子一看，这地方好啊，鹬与鹬完全平等，谁也不是王，谁也不是奴。咱们走！于是带上母猴子和小猴子，到鹬湖定居。管移民工作的鹬官也很给面子，当时发了“鹬证”，又给安上长腿，再安上翅膀，猛一看，猴子就成了鹬啦。加上这些猴子本来追求平等，渴望自由，很快就融入了鹬湖的新生活。
说到这里，大家明白猴山是哪、鹬湖何在、追求平等的猴子是谁了吧？
啊哈，故事并没有完。首先，我热诚地肯定，在猴子的世界里，最些智慧的猴子最反对“猴山思想”。可是，在鹬的世界中，它们渐渐显出了“猴山思想”的残余。大猴山嘛，当然不要——全社会必须平等！可是，在“小猴山”——在俺家里，有一点父权，讲一点夫权，有什么不好呢？于是，训斥小猴子啊，揍两下母猴子呀，这样的事情不时发生。
大家应该知道，多伦多警方披露，在华人社区，最大的犯罪竟然是家庭暴力！大家应该知道, 是啊，最提倡男女平等的鹬们，听说公猴子关起门来揍母猴子，会觉得多么诧异啊！
老李事件，竟有人跳出来为他鸣冤。想想看，如果公猴子没打母猴子，那些鹬法官、鹬警察，凭什么让人家夫妻分离？
木然，你好木然！当年在猴山，你这只崇尚自由的猴子，一定大写男女平等、官民平等吧？可是，到了鹬湖，你怎么忽然跑音走调，唱起了猴山的老歌呢？可惜啊，可惜……是想抄作自己吗？抄作也得顺应鹬湖的风向啊！进什么山，唱什么歌……
李向东，木然，以及所有公猴子，听我真言如下：
1，千万别欺负母猴子。鹬会笑话，鹬会干预。这里是鹬的世界！
2，也别压制小猴子。他们其实不是猴子，他们已经是鹬！如果你非要把他当猴子训斥，将来他长大了，会以猴山的法则来对付你这只老猴子。
3，你愿意取下长腿、摘下翅膀，重回旧日的猴山吗？如果不愿意，就放弃猴子的父权思想、夫权观念，从里到外，当一只真正的鹬……

daydreaming

I read Mr. Mu Ran's article from his Blog last night, but did not comment since it was too late. However, I have a few words to say just like Sedona.

1.

How Mr. Mu Ran is able to judge that Mr. Lee was wronged? Should his judgement be predominant to the court order?

If so, where does he get the authority and least of all, sufficient eveidence and principles based on which he is able to be so sure?

If he disagrees with the court order Mr. Lee gets, please go to the court and appeal!

2.
His criticism is based on Mr. Lee's perspective only as he disclosed, Amanda refused to talk over his program. How could he conclude that Mr. Lee was wronged by not listening to Amanda's story as he criticized the documentary film not having listened to MR. Lee's story.

3.

In another piece of his artile, he wrote that Canadian Justice System favors women in Domestic Violence cases.

I wondered how did Mr. Mu concluded so definitely about this statement? How many cases have you dealt with or how much do you know Justice System?

4.

Domestic violence is an issue to be seriously treated and studied. It is far more from what you are able to tell, understand and conclude from your past HIERARCHY EXPERIENCE taken from China.

Domestic Violence should not be an eye-ball attraction in an Internet Age. With conscience, this should be further discussed, clarified and accepted on the Forum rather than satisfying audience curiosity and confusing the public.



5.

I would rather a honest and conscientious man in Chinese community just say whatever you know; don't say whatever you don't know about, especially, don't jump to conclusions easily.

daydreaming

FORMS OF WOMAN ABUSE


PHYSICAL              

Any unwanted contact. May include hitting, slapping, pushing, kicking, burning, choking, locking her in her room, standing too close, restraining her in any way, picking her up, holding or hugging when it is unwanted, pointing a finger, poking her, hitting her with objects, using a weapon, murder, etc.

VERBAL/
EMOTIONAL/
PSYCHOLOGICAL

Insults, yelling, name calling, verbal threats (Ex: ‘I will kill myself if you..’) starting arguments, falsely accusing her of sleeping around, overly sarcastic or critical, trying to get the last word in, woman hating jokes or putdowns, including fear, intimidation, manipulation, humiliation, harassment, inappropriate expression of jealousy, brainwashing, dominance, laughing in her face, ignoring her, refusing to do things with or for her, abusing the children, getting his own way, not coming home, coming home drunk, real or suggested involvement with other women, comparing her with other women, taking away her responsibilities, treating her like a child, not keeping commitments, being rude, lack of consideration for her opinion, disbelieving her, ect.

SEXUAL

Rape, forcing unwanted acts, inflicting pain during intercourse, denying birth control, lack of intimacy, having affairs, hounding her for sex, refusing sex, treating her as a sex object, being rough, pornography, using sex as a basis for arguments, etc.

FINANCIAL

Denying money for wants or needs, denying information about couple’s financial situation, making all financial decisions, spending money foolishly or beyond means, not spending money on special occasions (Ex: birthdays), etc.

SOCIAL

Isolating her, denying access to a telephone, not taking responsibility for the children, embarrassment or insults in front of others, not letting her see her friends or family, not being nice to her friends or family, choosing his friends or family over her, not taking her out, keeping her busy in the kitchen at a party, change of personality with others, making a ‘scene’, etc.

ENVIRONMENTAL

Locking her in, taking the phones, slamming doors, breaking things, throwing objects, turning up the stereo or TV too loud, harming or threatening to harm pets, throwing out her clothes, driving recklessly with her, etc.

木然

好像讨论在脱离话题。

没有人可以定李或吴谁对谁错，只有法官才能定，编辑部不能定，木然也不能定，平权会也不能定。

李有没有错？一定有，要不不会出现今天这样的结局。

问题是，平权会拍摄一个片子，采取真名真姓地演绎，拍摄前没有与李向东进行接触，了解，更没有取得李的同意，这合不合理？

现在我们假设，李向东确实是有暴力侵犯太太，我们搬这故事上荧幕，真名真姓，应不应该取得李家双方的同意呢？如果事情发生在你、我、他任何一个家庭，一个组织不经过你的同意，就将你的家事拍成电影、记录片去宣传，你会有什么感受？会接受这种事实吗？

一部用于宣传教育的片子，受到当事人投诉，这部片的原意还在吗？

费老

最初由[木然]发布
好像讨论在脱离话题。

没有人可以定李或吴谁对谁错，只有法官才能定，编辑部不能定，木然也不能定，平权会也不能定。

李有没有错？一定有，要不不会出现今天这样的结局。

问题是，平权会拍摄一个片子，采取真名真姓地演绎，拍摄前没有与李向东进行接触，了解，更没有取得李的同意，这合不合理？

现在我们假设，李向东确实是有暴力侵犯太太，我们搬这故事上荧幕，真名真姓，应不应该取得李家双方的同意呢？如果事情发生在你、我、他任何一个家庭，一个组织不经过你的同意，就将你的家事拍成电影、记录片去宣传，你会有什么感受？会接受这种事实吗？

一部用于宣传教育的片子，受到当事人投诉，这部片的原意还在吗？ 平 权 会 不 是 居 委 会 ！拍 这 部 片 子 是为 了 谴 责家 庭 暴 力 而 不 是 调 解 家 庭 纠 纷 ！  
      当 平 权 会 认 为 手 中 的 资 料 真 实 而 可 信 时 ， 为 什 么 非 要 在 拍 摄  之 前 与 老 李 接 触 呢 ？ 为 什 么 非 要 征 得 他 的 同 意 呢 ？ 当 事 人 不 同 意 ， 就 不 合 理 ？ 这 是 多 么 荒 诞 而 可 笑 的 逻 辑 啊 ？      试 问 ， 哪 个 人 愿 意 以 反 面 角 色 出 现 在这 样 的 宣 传 片 中 ？ ？ ？ ？