World News

2225 readers

822 users here now

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Deceptichum@quokk.au

Grainne@lemmy.dbzer0.com

China film about woman whose killing of husband framed as result of domestic violence banned (www.scmp.com)

submitted 4 weeks ago by Lemmynated@lemmy.zip to c/world@quokk.au

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 29 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

The film has been boasting that it is the adaptation of the “true story” of a woman who killed her husband by accident while fighting against his long-term domestic violence.

The verdict in Zhao’s trial found that she used a fruit knife to stab her husband to death

No domestic violence was mentioned in the actual verdict, in contrast to Zhao’s persona in the film, that of a heroine resisting domestic violence.

they obtained the approval from the prison to let Zhao play in the film by saying that they were preparing a “documentary”

But what they produced turned out to be a commercial film. This is against the law because the China Prison Law stipulates that all prison activities must only serve the goal of education.

Slayyy (your husband, with a fruit knife) Queen

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 14 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

What is it with Western Media constantly glazing Chinese scammers?

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 19 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

I'm not going to entirely discard her claims of abuse given that the court gave her such a lenient sentence.

But also definitely not the girl boss being punished by misogynists for defending herself that western media want her to be.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 21 points 4 weeks ago

It's more this bit

they obtained the approval from the prison to let Zhao play in the film by saying that they were preparing a “documentary” But what they produced turned out to be a commercial film

And then dressing it up as state censorship