Is Ai Fukuhara a Villain?

[TensorBackhand]

Bringing up issues like this is misogyny. Warning you in advance. If a man did this, would you feel the same way?

yes

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

so more valid question is, how do you marry a Japanese person today?

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

AI and her husband may owe explanations to family friends and appropriate authorities in Japan and Taipei. Above all there are children to care for
But to those people in this thread who have made insinuations and passed judgement without proof, Ai and her husband owe nothing to people who have just indulged themselves at the expense of her reputation without any proof

you know, what you say is true

but then, Ai makes her millions by living in the spotlight and having those millions of followers and her "marketing value" on these people.
She used the people talking about her on these forums and everywhere else to make her big money, not by playing table tennis. I think that you can not deny.

It is obviously for the same reason why the media loves her "bad" news too. since it makes them money too.
Ai has been a public figure since something like 6 years old.
She hasn't been one for the past 2 years. It does take a bit getting used to.

 

[ttmonster]

Well, the point of entering a discussion is that one is willing to discuss and one can stop discussing at any time. Since you consider my position untenable when I find it far from so, then maybe my response in a forum like this one is more for anyone who wants to read.

1. Takkyu lives in Japan and Tony comes from Taiwan. Zeio I believe lives in Hong Kong. I have maybe watched the ERT video once. The ERT video was not the first time I heard of this.

2. There is a whole history to men's rights activism based on the idea that feminism has gone too far in considering what men have done historically "misogyny". That discussion is too complicated to settle here and is probably in your view "untenable", since you consider how men have historically treated women to be a form of "abuse". The broad lines of the argument though are that as men took on the riskier and physical roles in society that required one to risk violence and death and women were traditionally the nurturers. Some of this has a basis in obvious biology, some of it in subtle biology. Right now, in some cases, women are talking about being abused when inequality obtains in a situation without looking at the context. I am not saying that there isn't nuance to the discussion, but your position might be that having the discussion is defacto "untenable".

3. A Japanese court has ruled against Fukuhara, She was at the very least in violation of the law of Taiwan and she is likely also in violation of the law in Japan. But at the risk of being accused of insinuating, we all know that money can buy the law, just ask Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

Since all of the above is "untenable", it is not really a serious response to what you have written. It is more of an appeal to you to realize that even when others disagree with you on a complex issue, it is because it is a complex issue!

I think you missed the point here, I did not say any of the three things you mentioned as untenable, what I pointed out is your position that "this kind of discussion is worthwhile and reflecting of free speech and we can learn from it to apply to our lives rather than just another example of misogyny fed from celebrity voyeurism"... untenable .

You also chose not to respond to the quotes I referred to.

Of course the issue is complex , of course there can be disagreements. All I have been trying to say from the beginning is that this is a private matter and in such matters one can't have all the facts leading up to the actions that one can bank on and take these kind of judgmental positions to the extent of summarily denouncing Fukuhara as villainous :

1. none of us have been a teenage superstar since our early teens in a misogynistic society.
2. we haven't had our privacy invaded and our affairs splashed on the front page of news papers since we were a kid..
3. we haven't had to carry the burden of not fulfilling the early promise and expectations that were put on our shoulders since we were kids .

I am not even counting the alleged emotional abuse she might have had to put up with and the fact that she is the one who is the mother here . So we are not in her shoes period.

For me it would be just shameful to be even associated with a set of people who are unable to consider the subtleties of the situation here , and painting with broad brushes and taking out their frustrations over a situation where its nearly impossible to know what really went down.

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

 

[NextLevel]

I think you missed the point here, I did not say any of the three things you mentioned as untenable, what I pointed out is your position that "this kind of discussion is worthwhile and reflecting of free speech and we can learn from it to apply to our lives rather than just another example of misogyny fed from celebrity voyeurism"... untenable .

You also chose not to respond to the quotes I referred to.

Of course the issue is complex , of course there can be disagreements. All I have been trying to say from the beginning is that this is a private matter and in such matters one can't have all the facts leading up to the actions that one can bank on and take these kind of judgmental positions to the extent of summarily denouncing Fukuhara as villainous :

1. none of us have been a teenage superstar since our early teens in a misogynistic society.
2. we haven't had our privacy invaded and our affairs splashed on the front page of news papers since we were a kid..
3. we haven't had to carry the burden of not fulfilling the early promise and expectations that were put on our shoulders since we were kids .

I am not even counting the alleged emotional abuse she might have had to put up with and the fact that she is the one who is the mother here . So we are not in her shoes period.

For me it would be just shameful to be even associated with a set of people who are unable to consider the subtleties of the situation here , and painting with broad brushes and taking out their frustrations over a situation where its nearly impossible to know what really went down.

Each numbered response was targeted to a specific quote, I really don't have the time to argue over things when someone has already pointed out that what I say is "untenable". For example, you wrote:

"This entire discussion is based on ERT's videos and tabloid journalism . ERT is the biggest click bait there is in the table tennis youtuber community , I think you would agree , and tabloid journalism , well the name explains itself."

To which I responded:

"1. Takkyu lives in Japan and Tony comes from Taiwan. Zeio I believe lives in Hong Kong. I have maybe watched the ERT video once. The ERT video was not the first time I heard of this."

The idea that Ai is being targeted as a result of misogyny is an interesting one.. Framing the discussion in such lens is possible, but it makes all discussion simply get framed as that any criticism of Ai's behavior is misogyny. I have no problem with the idea that everyone's experiences are biased somehow and that people go through experiences that might shape their behavior. At some point, we find ways to hold people responsible for what we think they do because that is how the world and the law works with some accommodation for cases when we know benevolence can make a difference. But I do wonder whether if the roles were reversed, whether you would be as accommodating to the man since the misogyny argument would no longer apply.

 

[ttmonster]

Each numbered response was targeted to a specific quote, I really don't have the time to argue over things when someone has already pointed out that what I say is "untenable". For example, you wrote:

"This entire discussion is based on ERT's videos and tabloid journalism . ERT is the biggest click bait there is in the table tennis youtuber community , I think you would agree , and tabloid journalism , well the name explains itself."

To which I responded:

"1. Takkyu lives in Japan and Tony comes from Taiwan. Zeio I believe lives in Hong Kong. I have maybe watched the ERT video once. The ERT video was not the first time I heard of this."

The idea that Ai is being targeted as a result of misogyny is an interesting one.. Framing the discussion in such lens is possible, but it makes all discussion simply get framed as that any criticism of Ai's behavior is misogyny. I have no problem with the idea that everyone's experiences are biased somehow and that people go through experiences that might shape their behavior. At some point, we find ways to hold people responsible for what we think they do because that is how the world and the law works with some accommodation for cases when we know benevolence can make a difference. But I do wonder whether if the roles were reversed, whether you would be as accommodating to the man since the misogyny argument would no longer apply.

I have not said anything you say is untenable, with due respect you do make massive contributions with your knowledge and insight into the game but you also sometimes take untenable positions and keep debating just because you simply like the exercise or at least thats the perception I get and i may be wrong.

My intention was to ask you whether you really feel this way or you are just debating as an exercise simply because I could not believe some of the outpouring that was going on here and you were choosing to ignore those .. anyways .. my response ..

1. Takkyu , Tony and Zeio are still quoting news sources, they are not first person reporters , and most of the reporting they are referring to are tabloid journalism who show an interest in this kind of news simply because its spicy and aids circulation. There are plenty of similar situation in every other household that does not make the news. And how is "And as a fellow man I’m siding with the father of course in this story" .. justified with any logic. ?

2. I don't get how you can justify somebody saying that because the father is paying for the upkeep of the family means he deserves to do whatever he pleases ... with your argument on feminism going too far ...
Any activism has the risk of going too far and yes I agree in some cases feminism has .. but again we don't know the details of this story and simply because a man pays does not mean he is a good husband and father .... and deserves to keep the custody of the child . You can clearly see the overall philosophy of the member here in his subsequent posts.

3. How is ignoring somebody's privacy justified because the court ruled against them ? In Saudi Arabia they tie up the adulterers and throw stones a them till they die ... in California its a no fault divorce ... laws change from country to country .. does not mean all of them are accurate or fair... they are part of mechanism put in place by flawed people just like us to hold the society in place .And its mostly made up by powerful sections to their advantage.
If somebody is claiming that because they are professional lawyers it gives them right to judge somebody else's behavior and denounce them and its alright that if their privacy gets invaded .. i cannot understand what the courts' ruling has to do anything with it. It just speaks to the utterly immature take on this whole situation.


With these examples I was pointing out that there is nothing to be learnt here except that don't judge people as you are not in their shoes .. simple ..

 

[pingpongpaddy]

• 103

AI and her husband may owe explanations to family friends and appropriate authorities in Japan and Taipei. Above all there are children to care for
But to those people in this thread who have made insinuations and passed judgement without proof, Ai and her husband owe nothing to people who have just indulged themselves at the expense of her reputation without any proof

"Tony's Table Tennis":
you know, what you say is true

but then, Ai makes her millions by living in the spotlight and having those millions of followers and her "marketing value" on these people.
She used the people talking about her on these forums and everywhere else to make her big money, not by playing table tennis. I think that you can not deny.

It is obviously for the same reason why the media loves her "bad" news too. since it makes them money too.
Ai has been a public figure since something like 6 years old.
She hasn't been one for the past 2 years. It does take a bit getting used to.

TTT
At the age of 74
I understand where you are coming from.
however as a long term tt nerd, coach who gets a lot out of interest and joy from observing the pro tt world of stars, I would feel badly about myself, if I felt entitled to write things about their personal lives as though they have no personal feelings. I want to treat them with the same respect I want for myself and my family.

PPP

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

• 103

"Tony's Table Tennis":
you know, what you say is true

but then, Ai makes her millions by living in the spotlight and having those millions of followers and her "marketing value" on these people.
She used the people talking about her on these forums and everywhere else to make her big money, not by playing table tennis. I think that you can not deny.

It is obviously for the same reason why the media loves her "bad" news too. since it makes them money too.
Ai has been a public figure since something like 6 years old.
She hasn't been one for the past 2 years. It does take a bit getting used to.

TTT
At the age of 74
I understand where you are coming from.
however as a long term tt nerd, coach who gets a lot out of interest and joy from observing the pro tt world of stars, I would feel badly about myself, if I felt entitled to write things about their personal lives as though they have no personal feelings. I want to treat them with the same respect I want for myself and my family.

PPP

You have good values!
I'm sure nobody here wish for anything bad on Ai or Chiang (other than post number 2 calling Chiang trash) and it seem like everyone just wants kids to unite with both parents.
Sadly, it does seem like the wound will take a long to heal and what has happened will remain on the internet for ever and the kids will all need to grow up facing it

 

[NextLevel]

I have not said anything you say is untenable, with due respect you do make massive contributions with your knowledge and insight into the game but you also sometimes take untenable positions and keep debating just because you simply like the exercise or at least thats the perception I get and i may be wrong.

My intention was to ask you whether you really feel this way or you are just debating as an exercise simply because I could not believe some of the outpouring that was going on here and you were choosing to ignore those .. anyways .. my response ..

1. Takkyu , Tony and Zeio are still quoting news sources, they are not first person reporters , and most of the reporting they are referring to are tabloid journalism who show an interest in this kind of news simply because its spicy and aids circulation. There are plenty of similar situation in every other household that does not make the news. And how is "And as a fellow man I’m siding with the father of course in this story" .. justified with any logic. ?

2. I don't get how you can justify somebody saying that because the father is paying for the upkeep of the family means he deserves to do whatever he pleases ... with your argument on feminism going too far ...
Any activism has the risk of going too far and yes I agree in some cases feminism has .. but again we don't know the details of this story and simply because a man pays does not mean he is a good husband and father .... and deserves to keep the custody of the child . You can clearly see the overall philosophy of the member here in his subsequent posts.

3. How is ignoring somebody's privacy justified because the court ruled against them ? In Saudi Arabia they tie up the adulterers and throw stones a them till they die ... in California its a no fault divorce ... laws change from country to country .. does not mean all of them are accurate or fair... they are part of mechanism put in place by flawed people just like us to hold the society in place .And its mostly made up by powerful sections to their advantage.
If somebody is claiming that because they are professional lawyers it gives them right to judge somebody else's behavior and denounce them and its alright that if their privacy gets invaded .. i cannot understand what the courts' ruling has to do anything with it. It just speaks to the utterly immature take on this whole situation.


With these examples I was pointing out that there is nothing to be learnt here except that don't judge people and if you are not in their shoes .. simple ..

1. No, not all reports in the popular press are from tabloid journalists. While those will often have juicier details, Ai is a big enough star that her issues are in the main press. As for siding with the man, Takkyu has given you a lot of the stories and issues that inform his position, you may or may not be familiar enough with situations like these to interpret them charitably. I can frame what he said a bit differently: "As a man, I have seen many of these situations decided with indifference to the interests of the father, so I am siding with the father of course." He cites the abduction of kids by Japanese parents as a statistic to make his point. You are just focused on how he is phrasing his position.

2. I think the question that was raised is not whether he can do whatever he pleases, which is how you frame it, but whether the fact that he is paying the mortgage gives him a right to see his kids even after the divorce occurs, especially in a country where there is no shared custody per se because they believe it is in the best interests of the child to be raised primarily by one parent. In many traditional societies, one sex is predominantly the bread winner, the other is the child nurturer. But depending on various incentives (legal and financial primarily), people can do things that may not seem fair when it comes to divorce. Right now, in the West, which I hope you don't think is also misogynistic, some of these issues play out in various ways, and it is framed as a battle of misogyny vs feminism. But it isn't always so simple, and it is much easier for a man today to work to feed his family, get divorced and lose custody because modern law often defaults to giving women finances and custody. If this is to redress past misogyny, then maybe women should be put into the draft to redress past inequalities as well? Of course, that is a silly point, the most important thing is that there should be incentives for everyone to work together.

3. The point is that you said that what Ai did wasn't illegal and my point is that two courts have ruled in way that make it illegal and some people have gone as far as calling what she did kidnapping. Whether she can be arrested is another story because she is wealthy. I agree that the law is not always "fair", but it is the law. If someone is taking a position on the basis that someone is violating the law, then that is a reason to say the party violating the law is wrong - it's that simple. You may not agree, but if you have been ruled against in a court of law, some people use that as a basis to say that what you have done is wrong, even if what you are doing is entirely reasonable. It definitely is not an immature take, it is the traditional take.

The idea of not judging people if you have not walked in their shoes would invalidate the whole legal system. Or even make any form of judgment almost impossible. What we are doing is what most people do - have reasonable discussions which inform and enlighten us and help us get to a better place. In all you have written, you have not explained why Chuang *deserves* to have his son kept away from him. The sad thing is that this is not a deserves issue, but it does have cultural implications. Sometimes, it takes issues like these to help bring some things into the spotlight that would otherwise not get any, Some fathers are quietly suffering thing like this - that is Takkyu's point.

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

1. No, not all reports in the popular press are from tabloid journalists. While those will often have juicier details, Ai is a big enough star that her issues are in the main press. As for siding with the man, Takkyu has given you a lot of the stories and issues that inform his position, you may or may not be familiar enough with situations like these to interpret them charitably. I can frame what he said a bit differently: "As a man, I have seen many of these situations decided with indifference to the interests of the father, so I am siding with the father of course." He cites the abduction of kids by Japanese parents as a statistic to make his point. You are just focused on how he is phrasing his position.

2. I think the question that was raised is not whether he can do whatever he pleases, which is how you frame it, but whether the fact that he is paying the mortgage gives him a right to see his kids even after the divorce occurs, especially in a country where there is no shared custody per se because they believe it is in the best interests of the child to be raised primarily by one parent. In many traditional societies, one sex is predominantly the bread winner, the other is the child nurturer. But depending on various incentives (legal and financial primarily), people can do things that may not seem fair when it comes to divorce. Right now, in the West, which I hope you don't think is also misogynistic, some of these issues play out in various ways, and it is framed as a battle of misogyny vs feminism. But it isn't always so simple, and it is much easier for a man today to work to feed his family, get divorced and lose custody because modern law often defaults to giving women finances and custody. If this is to redress past misogyny, then maybe women should be put into the draft to redress past inequalities as well? Of course, that is a silly point, the most important thing is that there should be incentives for everyone to work together.

3. The point is that you said that what Ai did wasn't illegal and my point is that two courts have ruled in way that make it illegal and some people have gone as far as calling what she did kidnapping. Whether she can be arrested is another story because she is wealthy. I agree that the law is not always "fair", but it is the law. If someone is taking a position on the basis that someone is violating the law, then that is a reason to say the party violating the law is wrong - it's that simple. You may not agree, but if you have been ruled against in a court of law, some people use that as a basis to say that what you have done is wrong, even if what you are doing is entirely reasonable. It definitely is not an immature take, it is the traditional take.

The idea of not judging people if you have not walked in their shoes would invalidate the whole legal system. Or even make any form of judgment almost impossible. What we are doing is what most people do - have reasonable discussions which inform and enlighten us and help us get to a better place. In all you have written, you have not explained why Chuang *deserves* to have his son kept away from him. The sad thing is that this is not a deserves issue, but it does have cultural implications. Sometimes, it takes issues like these to help bring some things into the spotlight that would otherwise not get any, Some fathers are quietly suffering thing like this - that is Takkyu's point.

have the both of you seen the footage I posted?
I think the lawyer was very careful in answering and the 58 min can be short formed to maybe 10 mins.
But 20th of July, was the court order date of when the boy had to be handed back to Chiang. It didn't happen, so they called that press meeting.

Questions was asked about, what if Ai goes to another country....
The answer was, then they would need to approach the court in that country too..

 

[NextLevel]

t

have the both of you seen the footage I posted?
I think the lawyer was very careful in answering and the 58 min can be short formed to maybe 10 mins.
But 20th of July, was the court order date of when the boy had to be handed back to Chiang. It didn't happen, so they called that press meeting.

Questions was asked about, what if Ai goes to another country....
The answer was, then they would need to approach the court in that country too..

I just watched the video, they translated into English. The problem, per ttmonster, is that any judgment against Fukuhara is misogyny so it doesn't matter.

For people who want to know what the video said, they issued a rare temporary restraining order against Fukuhara in the Japanese court on July 20 asking her to immediately hand over the son, which she has the wealth to do - the press conference was called when she failed to perform as requested.

I get it, maybe Ai has good reasons for all this. And there is no need for her to tell us any of those reasons. She is doing what is best for the child and the father is getting what he deserves for the history of a misogynist society.

 

[ttmonster]

1. No, not all reports in the popular press are from tabloid journalists. While those will often have juicier details, Ai is a big enough star that her issues are in the main press. As for siding with the man, Takkyu has given you a lot of the stories and issues that inform his position, you may or may not be familiar enough with situations like these to interpret them charitably. I can frame what he said a bit differently: "As a man, I have seen many of these situations decided with indifference to the interests of the father, so I am siding with the father of course." He cites the abduction of kids by Japanese parents as a statistic to make his point. You are just focused on how he is phrasing his position.

2. I think the question that was raised is not whether he can do whatever he pleases, which is how you frame it, but whether the fact that he is paying the mortgage gives him a right to see his kids even after the divorce occurs, especially in a country where there is no shared custody per se because they believe it is in the best interests of the child to be raised primarily by one parent. In many traditional societies, one sex is predominantly the bread winner, the other is the child nurturer. But depending on various incentives (legal and financial primarily), people can do things that may not seem fair when it comes to divorce. Right now, in the West, which I hope you don't think is also misogynistic, some of these issues play out in various ways, and it is framed as a battle of misogyny vs feminism. But it isn't always so simple, and it is much easier for a man today to work to feed his family, get divorced and lose custody because modern law often defaults to giving women finances and custody. If this is to redress past misogyny, then maybe women should be put into the draft to redress past inequalities as well? Of course, that is a silly point, the most important thing is that there should be incentives for everyone to work together.

3. The point is that you said that what Ai did wasn't illegal and my point is that two courts have ruled in way that make it illegal and some people have gone as far as calling what she did kidnapping. Whether she can be arrested is another story because she is wealthy. I agree that the law is not always "fair", but it is the law. If someone is taking a position on the basis that someone is violating the law, then that is a reason to say the party violating the law is wrong - it's that simple. You may not agree, but if you have been ruled against in a court of law, some people use that as a basis to say that what you have done is wrong, even if what you are doing is entirely reasonable. It definitely is not an immature take, it is the traditional take.

The idea of not judging people if you have not walked in their shoes would invalidate the whole legal system. Or even make any form of judgment almost impossible. What we are doing is what most people do - have reasonable discussions which inform and enlighten us and help us get to a better place. In all you have written, you have not explained why Chuang *deserves* to have his son kept away from him. The sad thing is that this is not a deserves issue, but it does have cultural implications. Sometimes, it takes issues like these to help bring some things into the spotlight that would otherwise not get any, Some fathers are quietly suffering thing like this - that is Takkyu's point.

Thanks for clarifying your position.

Let me address

you have not explained why Chuang *deserves* to have his son kept away from him

I have never said he does. All I have said from the beginning is that lets not judge people with incomplete information and hope the kid gets out with the least amount of mental trauma. I am not privy to information that lets me decide what is best for the kid so why would I suggest either way is good for him ? Its just that most of the posts here are calling for Fukuhara's head , and hence I was tryin to point out that
we simply DO NOT KNOW the whole story and most likely we will never know . Any comment here is just a guess and in most cases biased with personal beliefs and experiences.

1. Takkyu's stories :
"Ai just thinks like 90% of Japanese women that in such circumstances fathers don’t have any more rights. She behaved like most Japanese women would and kidnapped her child, defying international laws as she knows that in Japan she is far from the reach of Taiwan law, and that time plays in her favor.

There is an estimated 150,000 children abducted in Japan - a year ?"

A story about a french father being denied access to his children .. and ..
"
There are always special cases where the father gets custody. It is well known for example that former prime minister Junichiro Koizumi raised his son after his divorce. I don’t know how it happened.

So it’s not « written » in the law that mom has custody. It’s just what happens.
The reason why sole custody is the norm in Japan is because it is (was) believed it’s the best way to protect the children"

Which of these convinced you that these are relevant numbers for our discussion ? are all the 150,000 children being abducted my their moms ? is AI thinks like 90% of Japanese women a stat because there is number there ?


He said what he said and I quoted him exactly , why do you feel the need to rephrase him ?

2. Again here the OP clearly said that because the man is paying for he upkeep of his family how dare the mom think she can get the custody ? I don't understand how this has to do anything with past misogyny .. this is a shining example of present and current misogyny .

3. I have not said anywhere what ai has done is not illegal, what i have said is that we don't know the context. Since this is not a murder or burglary or physical assault there she was caught with a smoking gun .. its hard to take a clear position without knowing the complete facts. May be Ai is completely in the wrong may be she is not , may be time will tell may it will not. The whole thing is a messed up custody battle and the suits and countersuits are still going on along with media posturing which is clearly what Chuang and his team is doing because they think thats the best way to get their justice .

I never said anything said against her is misogyny , for some reason you are picking out certain words that strike a nerve like "untenable " and "misogyny" and repeatedly misrepresenting what I really said to prove your point.

What I said is that japan is historically a misogynistic society , which is a fact :

Why Japan can't shake sexism

Gender equality keeps making headlines in Japan for all the wrong reasons. Why is that and what will it take for things to change?

www.bbc.com

Also not judging somebody unless you are in their shoes just precludes that which is ill informed judgements not legal action against actual crimes.

 

[ttmonster]

have the both of you seen the footage I posted?
I think the lawyer was very careful in answering and the 58 min can be short formed to maybe 10 mins.
But 20th of July, was the court order date of when the boy had to be handed back to Chiang. It didn't happen, so they called that press meeting.

Questions was asked about, what if Ai goes to another country....
The answer was, then they would need to approach the court in that country too..

I did.

 

[turbozed]

Japan is a historically misogynistic society. I'll agree with that. But I would argue that their xenophobia far exceeds their misogyny. Anyone who has spent any time in Japan would know that while Japanese women occupy a status lower than Japanese men, Japanese women are still far much preferred and protected over the interests of foreign men in both legal, cultural, and insitutional terms.

Add this to the millieu of family and custody law, which everyone is well aware *heavily* favors women, and the fact that we're talking about a *beloved national sports hero*, and I think it's rather absurd to introduce misogyny into this conversation. Doing so is either grossly ignorant or purposeful misandry. I'm hoping it's the former.

Given the way this thread is going, I'm going to revise my opinion of Fukuhara to give her credit for her gambit. I thought that sort of behavior made it pretty obvious she was in the wrong and social/media pressure would have her return the child, but it looks like her past accolades and status as a beloved figure truly has carried forward to the extent some people are willing to overlook child abduction and depriving a child of stability and a father. Baffling still is how these people are arguing on her behalf while claiming some bizarre moral highground.

In the end, the rules truly don't apply to the rich and powerful.

Maybe I'm being a bit too harsh since my background working on family law cases. I can only tell you that to lawyers and judges who've worked decades trying to ensure the safety and wellbeing of children, Fukuhara's behavior is considered top scumbag level (below but not far behind abuse). I'm willing to entertain mitigating circumstances, but really none have been provided. Waiting for the details to come out is great when there's no time sensitivity, but there's still a missing child and a father in immense agony. At the very least, she should come out and say something to ease the minds of everyone involved.

 

[NextLevel]

Thanks for clarifying your position.

Let me address

I have never said he does. All I have said from the beginning is that lets not judge people with incomplete information and hope the kid gets out with the least amount of mental trauma. I am not privy to information that lets me decide what is best for the kid so why would I suggest either way is good for him ? Its just that most of the posts here are calling for Fukuhara's head , and hence I was tryin to point out that
we simply DO NOT KNOW the whole story and most likely we will never know . Any comment here is just a guess and in most cases biased with personal beliefs and experiences.

1. Takkyu's stories :
"Ai just thinks like 90% of Japanese women that in such circumstances fathers don’t have any more rights. She behaved like most Japanese women would and kidnapped her child, defying international laws as she knows that in Japan she is far from the reach of Taiwan law, and that time plays in her favor.

There is an estimated 150,000 children abducted in Japan - a year ?"

A story about a french father being denied access to his children .. and ..
"
There are always special cases where the father gets custody. It is well known for example that former prime minister Junichiro Koizumi raised his son after his divorce. I don’t know how it happened.

So it’s not « written » in the law that mom has custody. It’s just what happens.
The reason why sole custody is the norm in Japan is because it is (was) believed it’s the best way to protect the children"

Which of these convinced you that these are relevant numbers for our discussion ? are all the 150,000 children being abducted my their moms ? is AI thinks like 90% of Japanese women a stat because there is number there ?


He said what he said and I quoted him exactly , why do you feel the need to rephrase him ?

2. Again here the OP clearly said that because the man is paying for he upkeep of his family how dare the mom think she can get the custody ? I don't understand how this has to do anything with past misogyny .. this is a shining example of present and current misogyny .

3. I have not said anywhere what ai has done is not illegal, what i have said is that we don't know the context. Since this is not a murder or burglary or physical assault there she was caught with a smoking gun .. its hard to take a clear position without knowing the complete facts. May be Ai is completely in the wrong may be she is not , may be time will tell may it will not. The whole thing is a messed up custody battle and the suits and countersuits are still going on along with media posturing which is clearly what Chuang and his team is doing because they think thats the best way to get their justice .

I never said anything said against her is misogyny , for some reason you are picking out certain words that strike a nerve like "untenable " and "misogyny" and repeatedly misrepresenting what I really said to prove your point.

What I said is that japan is historically a misogynistic society , which is a fact :

Why Japan can't shake sexism

Gender equality keeps making headlines in Japan for all the wrong reasons. Why is that and what will it take for things to change?

www.bbc.com

1. You can ask Takkyu what he meant if you both have the patience. I rephrase him because I think you are misrepresenting his position because he didn't express his full intent. Ask him if he would never support the woman in a case of divorce since he is a man. I am sure his answer would surprise you., maybe not, because you probably are just trying to win an argument and interpreting his bias as favorably to your position as you can.

2. That is your opinion and is the most uncharitable explanation and it is why I expand on these things to reveal unstated premises. Remember that in Japan, usually only one parent gets custody. Traditionally, men were breadwinners, women were nurturers. If the man is fulfilling his traditional role, why is he going to lose custody to his child in a divorce? That is the original premise. Feel free to let us know what a father should do to keep custody of his child when a divorce occurs. Especially in cases where divorce lets the woman keep the child most of the time in a one-parent custody country.

3. There have been two court rulings in Chuang's favor - that said, maybe this may be like the Johnny Depp case where the British court ruled one way and the American court ruled differently. So maybe something that happens in a new court might support your view that there is something missing that we don't know. Based on the current evidence, it is obvious she is taking advantage of her wealth and social status. That is the reasonable conclusion, and the main reason to suspend judgment is "just because".

One thing to know about women - if this guy had touched her even once or had abused her children even once, he would be in jail. That's part of the reason I am not waiting for invisible evidence.

 

[NextLevel]

Japan is a historically misogynistic society. I'll agree with that. But I would argue that their xenophobia far exceeds their misogyny. Anyone who has spent any time in Japan would know that while Japanese women occupy a status lower than Japanese men, Japanese women are still far much preferred and protected over the interests of foreign men in both legal, cultural, and insitutional terms.

It would be very hard to find a single society that isn't historically misogynistic by modern standards, even while accepting that Japan has resisted feminism more than other countries. And of course, I remember seeing a youtube video recently where the English menu of a Japanese restaurant had higher prices than the Japanese menu for the same meals. I suspect this doesn't happen only in Japan, but it was surprising all the same.

 

[ttmonster]

1. You can ask Takkyu what he meant if you both have the patience. I rephrase him because I think you are misrepresenting his position because he didn't express his full intent. Ask him if he would never support the woman in a case of divorce since he is a man. I am sure his answer would surprise you., maybe not, because you probably are just trying to win an argument and interpreting his bias as favorably to your position as you can.

2. That is your opinion and is the most uncharitable explanation and it is why I expand on these things to reveal unstated premises. Remember that in Japan, usually only one parent gets custody. Traditionally, men were breadwinners, women were nurturers. If the man is fulfilling his traditional role, why is he going to lose custody to his child in a divorce? That is the original premise. Feel free to let us know what a father should do to keep custody of his child when a divorce occurs. Especially in cases where divorce lets the woman keep the child most of the time in a one-parent custody country.

3. There have been two court rulings in Chuang's favor - that said, maybe this may be like the Johnny Depp case where the British court ruled one way and the American court ruled differently. So maybe something that happens in a new court might support your view that there is something missing that we don't know. Based on the current evidence, it is obvious she is taking advantage of her wealth and social status. That is the reasonable conclusion, and the main reason to suspend judgment is "just because".

One thing to know about women - if this guy had touched her even once or had abused her children even once, he would be in jail. That's part of the reason I am not waiting for invisible evidence.

So your main defense against 1 & 2 is that both Takkyu and Tensorbackhand meant something else than what they have actually written , and you are the only person who knows what they "really meant" and the main reason to suspend judgement is "just because" .. wonderful !

Great ! I am not the one trying to "win an argument " here .. its clear to see .. what is going on ..

 

[igorponger]

Fukuhara is a true replica after chinese goddess known as Yang Ping. A fury embodied.

 

[NextLevel]

So your main defense against 1 & 2 is that both Takkyu and Tensorbackhand meant something else than what they have actually written , and you are the only person who knows what they "really meant" and the main reason to suspend judgement is "just because" .. wonderful !

Great ! I am not the one trying to "win an argument " here .. its clear to see .. what is going on ..

When I pointed out that the whole issue wasn't based exclusively on ERT's video, you pivoted to saying it was based on tabloids. And after I pointed out it wasn't just tabloids, you simply thanked me for clarifying my position.

The point here is that these are substantive issues affecting people. There is absolutely no evidence you have brought forth that explains why Chuang should be distrusted. It is just something you know for sure because these things are complicated.

If you want to make this about the nuances of what Takkyu and TBD said, be my guest - let's look at whether they mean what you claim they did.

The main point here is that there is a lot of sympathy for women in general whenever these issues arise because there is always a belief that the woman got abused somewhere, or the man cheated, or the man could not live up this obligations. Even when there is no evidence that shows *any* of this.