Saturday, February 21, 2009

请捍卫我的私领域

拨云见日(45)

请尊重我的隐私权,
请给我一点私人空间,
请协助我捍卫我的私领域!

推己及人,我想这三句话也许是时下从政者,尤其是女性从政者最想高声向大家喊的话吧!

虽然我看不出女议员和一般人在情感的需求上和一般人有什么不同,
虽然我觉得一个人婚否,关乎个人选择,更看不出女议员的婚姻关卿底事?

但无所回避的,女议员,尤其是未婚女议员的爱情与婚姻向来都是大家关注的课题,媒体无休止的车轮式追问(几乎每一年都问新年愿望包不包括找个如意郎君),国会内不止一次以女议员的未婚作为调侃的课题,没有多少人能够像冯宝君那么幸运几乎可以在毫无障碍的情况下顺利完婚(其实也不竟然,因为听说在308大选前因为她嫁给了柔佛人,而成了党内人士以“嫁鸡随鸡,嫁狗随狗”的理由要夺取她的选区而意图把她推去柔佛,导致她一度扬言退选!),一不小心则成了黄洁冰!如果黄洁冰是普通女性大概上不了头条!如果黄洁冰是普通女性,可能大家会把她当成社会新闻看过就算了!如果黄洁冰是男议员,大家会把事件中所可能涉及的“情欲”问题当成理所当然!可惜的是,她不是普通人,她是女性,而且是女性议员,是女性行政议员!

照道理说,在任何足以让人信服的证据证明她涉及不道德的情感或关系出现前,没有任何人有权从“道德”的角度评断这起事件,对她做出不公平的谴责;同样的,在没有任何证据证明这起事件是一项政治陷害前,没有任何人可以随随便便断言是敌对政党的肮脏手段!可惜的是,各政党里就偏偏都有为了政治利益而让自己的想象力无限发挥,同时将事件与“道德”和“政治”无限挂钩!这种做法模糊了事件必须探讨的根本问题,也让人民置疑这些“政客”的素质,品格与智慧!

在上述证据出现前,这起事件必须探讨的是课题应局限在揪出与严惩偷拍者、流传者的行为,因为(一)在没有经过当事人的同意之下而拍摄其身体,已触犯刑事法;(二)公开张贴这种照片也已构成触犯上述法令的理由;(三)任何公众参与分发、流传、转发上述照片应被谴责,因为这等同于鼓励色情,明显违反马来西亚法律。

如果上述所提证据果真出现,那么道德与政治陷害的议题才应获得讨论,即使获得讨论,揪出与严惩偷拍者与流传者的工作还是必须持续,让所有应受惩罚者受惩罚,这才是道理!(行文至此,眼睛突然瞄到报上以“拍摄”司法丑闻短片扬名的罗国本国会议员说:“黄洁冰的前男友H 先生长相俊俏,为人温文尔雅,不像会做出“出卖爱人“的事”!”- 哈!他喜欢“拍摄”,以貌取人,没什么不对!有趣!不是吗?)

周美芬
19/2/09

3 comments:

Chen said...

假如本身有道德观念的话,我想也不会有这种现象出现了。
当这些事情发生时,大多数人只在说同情及受害,偷拍的罪恶,却没去观注在他人本身的道德及人格的素质上,是否意味着这他人是对的?

阿土伯 said...

所谓的私领域,就是私人的空间。
我觉得在私人的空间,做想做的事,但却不干扰到别人的行为是没错的。但偷拍就错了。
女人长得美丽,穿着暴露是没错的。但强奸就错了。
就是说不管人家的行为有多坏,道德有多差,人格有多贱,你也不可侵犯。你侵犯,就是错了!

Han said...

Dear Datin Paduka

Basically, in my opinion, "Public Figures DO NOT have Private Lives". As elected or appointed representatives of the people, they are suppose to be one above the rest, become exemplary leaders and be pillars of good conducts and morality.

Their public persona should reflect good character, unblemished and almost “saintly”. One cannot have 2 personalities and put on a different face when you reach home. If so, it will amount to be schizophrenic.

As for the Elizabeth Wong case, she broke the very thin moral-line by knowingly going out with a Muslim man. Like it or not, we as Malaysians should respect the Islamic laws, and we all are aware that some of the laws are quite harsh when comes to morality or "Khalwat".

The Syariah Criminal Provisions Act (Federal Territories), Part IV, Section 27, Khalwat, states;

"Any (a) man who is found together with one or more women, not being his wife or mahram; or (b) woman who is found together with one or more men, not being her husband or mahram, in any secluded place or in a house or room under circumstances which may give rise to suspicion that they were engaged in immoral acts shall be guilty for an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding Three Thousand Ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both."

By definition, Ms.Wong has not committed any offence under the Syariah laws as she is not a Muslim and thus not subject to it. But she was a party to the actions that may lead to the "prosecution" of her then boyfriend. What went on inside the house when they were together is anyone's guess but I would guess a fair bit of hanky panky. If so, then the more severe punishment of Part IV, Section 23, Sexual Intercourse Out of Wedlock, could apply, viz,

“Any man who performs sexual intercourse with a woman who is not his lawful wife shall be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding five thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to whipping not exceeding six strokes or to any combination thereof.”

As an elected ADUN and EXCO member, her seemingly innocent love affair with a younger "toy boy" Muslim man has manifested into a ghost that will haunt her for rest of her life. It will be harder for her now as a law maker to justify why she went out with a Muslim man in the first place and why they cohabited knowing full well that such action is not tolerated under the Islamic law and the Muslim culture.

I think it has done irreversible damage to her image and others will take the opportunity to ridicule and taunt her if she still remains as a public figure and in office. The noblest option is for her to resign and retire gracefully.

Personally, I do sympathise with her but my sympathy will not correct her misjudgement. Sad but true, a broken glass remains a broken glass; no amount of glue can put back the pieces.

Thanks for your time to hear my side.
Regards