Japan makes it big in world news
Ernest Schaal
and there was a story about reports of Japanese politicians showing the
world how sexist they can be.
There is Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda who is is quoted as saying
that given young women's provocative style of dress, "there is room for
leniency" for rapists as men are "black panthers." Earlier, Liberal
Democratic Party lawmaker Seiichi Ota, reportedly said gang rape is a sign
of virility.
The news of these leading politician's remarks have been reported on
throughout Europe, America, and Asia. Is this really the type of news
coverage they want for Japan?
thegoons
"Ernest Schaal" <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote in message
news:BB2B766C.41AC%esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp...
Is this really the type of news
> coverage they want for Japan?
>
better, reading hentai anime comic.
John W.
> The news of these leading politician's remarks have been reported on
> throughout Europe, America, and Asia. Is this really the type of news
> coverage they want for Japan?
Probably not the news Japanese want about Japan, at least not if
anyone actually cares; historically Japanese politicians (and society
in general) isn't too concerned with such things.
But I haven't heard anything in the US media; but without Cable and
limited to online news, I'm can't exactly speak with authority on
this.
John W.
Ernest Schaal
worth...@yahoo.com wrote on 7/4/03 10:06 PM:
I found stories of it on Google News from Asia, Africa, Europe, North
America, and Australia (five of the seven continents), so I think one can
say it is officially world news.
Then there are the remarks of former Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori who is
reported as saying;
"Welfare is supposed to take care of and reward those women who have lots of
children. It is truly strange to say we have to use tax money to take care
of women who don't even give birth once, who grow old living their lives
selfishly and singing the praises of freedom."
Unfortunately, this mindset, which brings into mind the thinking of sexist
third world countries, seems to be accurately reported. Clearly, the
Japanese have a LONG way to go before the reach maturity.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> Then there are the remarks of former Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori who is
> reported as saying;
>
> "Welfare is supposed to take care of and reward those women who have lots
of
> children. It is truly strange to say we have to use tax money to take care
> of women who don't even give birth once, who grow old living their lives
> selfishly and singing the praises of freedom."
>
> Unfortunately, this mindset, which brings into mind the thinking of sexist
> third world countries, seems to be accurately reported. Clearly, the
> Japanese have a LONG way to go before the reach maturity.
I can see that the remarks you quote offend against the politically-correct
ethos of the Western world, but to define "maturity" as being "like us" is
rather narrow-minded (not to say politically-incorrect in its own right).
One might as well say Italy is immature because of politically-incorrect
comments made by Berlusconi. No society is truly "mature", no society is
above criticism, but Japan, by most standards - and despite the naffness of
some of its political leaders - is doing extremely well.
I'm not sticking up for the comments made (especially the moronic comments
about rape you cited in an earlier posting), but Mori's comments (quoted
above) need to be taken in the context of a peculiarly Japanese phenomenon,
known as "parasite singles". The parasite singles are a supposed generation
of female pleasure-seekers, who continue to live rent-free with their
parents, spend their entire salary on "accessories" and are perceived by the
rest of society as selfish. Not for them the responsibilites of marriage and
parenthood, or even of caring for their own parents when they grow old; they
will make sure they have talked their long-suffering parents into laying
down the deposit on an apartment and will be nowhere around by the time the
old folks are in their dotage.
To what extent the parasite singles really *exist* as a social force is not
clear. However, they have a life in people's imagination that is perhaps
independent of their actual existence (or existence in large numbers). This
is because this life-style has been focused on by the media. (Compare the
media-generated impression that foreigners were a significant cause - or
even the main cause - of crime in Japan, a perception which was rampant a
few years ago.)
However, it is certainly true that people are marrying much later and the
birth rate has fallen well below the rate needed to maintain the population
level. The "aging population" is a looming crisis.
The fact that Mori seeks a traditionalist response to this crisis in modern
Japan doesn't mean that the society as a whole is unsophisticated or
"immature". People are well enough aware of the options (a sharp increase in
immigration, far greater incentives for women to bear children, etc.), and
one way or another the society will adapt itself to the new circumstances.
Ernest Schaal
jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com wrote on 7/5/03 10:19 AM:
> I can see that the remarks you quote offend against the politically-correct
> ethos of the Western world, but to define "maturity" as being "like us" is
> rather narrow-minded (not to say politically-incorrect in its own right).
> One might as well say Italy is immature because of politically-incorrect
> comments made by Berlusconi. No society is truly "mature", no society is
> above criticism, but Japan, by most standards - and despite the naffness of
> some of its political leaders - is doing extremely well.
I don't know if I would say that by most standards Japan is doing extremely
well. While it is true that it has made great strides in a lot of areas, in
the areas of lack of respect for others of different races, or different
backgrounds, or different sexes, it is way behind the other developed
countries.
Your description of the "parasite singles" shows the same sexism that is
found in the quoted leaders, for it conveniently forgets that half the
"parasite singles" are male.
Mori's statements are demeaning of women, no matter what spin you want to
place on it, and show that Mori considers them less than men. Notice that he
wasn't suggesting that single men, who never father a child, also don't get
welfare when they are old.
I agree that an "aging population" is a looming crisis, but that is due in
large part to the sexism that remains dominant in Japanese society.
For instance, one reason given for the low birth rate in Japan is the
male-dominated medical profession does not consider pain-control to be
important in childbirth. My wife has told me that some women have told her
that they would never give birth in Japan because the Japanese male-dominate
medical profession dismisses their pain as unimportant.
Another reason is that women don't want to give up their careers, and they
realize that the typical Japanese male will not share the work at home.
Modern Japanese men are improving, but the ones in power tend to be the
reactionary types that still believe that Koreans wanted to have Japanese
names in WWII, and believe that the Japanese Imperial Army was a force of
good, and that Japanese snow is different from gaijin snow.
John W.
>
> I found stories of it on Google News from Asia, Africa, Europe, North
> America, and Australia (five of the seven continents), so I think one can
> say it is officially world news.
>
news like I should.
> Then there are the remarks of former Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori who is
> reported as saying;
>
> "Welfare is supposed to take care of and reward those women who have lots of
> children. It is truly strange to say we have to use tax money to take care
> of women who don't even give birth once, who grow old living their lives
> selfishly and singing the praises of freedom."
>
> Unfortunately, this mindset, which brings into mind the thinking of sexist
> third world countries, seems to be accurately reported. Clearly, the
> Japanese have a LONG way to go before the reach maturity.
Oddly, I might find myself in agreement if he'd made it a more generic
statement, replacing 'women' with 'people' and removing references to
having lots of kids. I find it an interesting comment, though. No
mention of women getting employment so they aren't on the dole
anymore.
John W.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> I don't know if I would say that by most standards Japan is doing
extremely
> well. While it is true that it has made great strides in a lot of areas,
in
> the areas of lack of respect for others of different races, or different
> backgrounds, or different sexes, it is way behind the other developed
> countries.
Well, it's true that there isn't the kind of legislation against
institutionalised prejudice that has developed in the West. I'm still not
sure whether that makes Japan "behind" or just "different", just as, say,
laws on gun control in much of the US are different from those in other
countries, but that doesn't make anyone more "advanced" or more "behind"
anyone else (or perhaps it does, and we've got a whole new issue to get our
teeth into!).
I'd also point out that young black males in the United States are more
likely to be in prison than university, and the UK seems headed to go the
same way and I can't quite see how this puts either country very much
"ahead" of Japan.
> Your description of the "parasite singles" shows the same sexism that is
> found in the quoted leaders, for it conveniently forgets that half the
> "parasite singles" are male.
I stand corrected. I let the media representation colour my own judgement
there. It was not only the fact that most media reports are of female
"parasite singles", but I think I actually read some kind of explanation
that, since there were not the same career expectations of women, females
were more prone to becoming "parasites". I checked a bit more thoroughly,
though, and I see you are right; there are as many male "parasite singles"
as females.
> I agree that an "aging population" is a looming crisis, but that is due in
> large part to the sexism that remains dominant in Japanese society.
I wouldn't disagree out of hand, and am probably as upset as you are at the
waste of human resources I see here in Japan. Even so, the fact that a few
right-wing politicians have their heads stuck in the sand doesn't reflect
the degree of maturity of the Japanese people any more than, say, a leader
who dismisses anything more sophisticated than "good=us, evil=anyone who
disagrees with us" is a reflection on the degree of maturity of the people
of the United States. You could say the whole world has a lot of growing up
to do, but no one's in a position to throw stones here.
> For instance, one reason given for the low birth rate in Japan is the
> male-dominated medical profession does not consider pain-control to be
> important in childbirth. My wife has told me that some women have told her
> that they would never give birth in Japan because the Japanese
male-dominate
> medical profession dismisses their pain as unimportant.
I'm surprised about that. Firstly, women are kept in hospital for about a
week after giving birth in Japan, which they *used* to be in the UK, until
the National Health Service decided to economise by booting them out on the
same day. Secondly, my wife had the most wonderful birthing experience,
despite some complications after delivery, and we could not have been
treated more sensitively and kindly. I say "we" because I was there
throughout, and all three of us were treated so well it was a wrench to
leave! True, we paid a bit extra for a private clinic, which provided all
the basic facilities available under the standard national insurance system
and then piled on extras (like a room to ourselves and beautifully-cooked
meals), but it's clear that if you do your homework there is a very wide
choice of birthing facilities available, and some very caring and competent
specialists.
> Another reason is that women don't want to give up their careers, and they
> realize that the typical Japanese male will not share the work at home.
Yes, obviously there's a lot of truth in that. An even bigger problem is the
lack of facilities. Home helps and babysitters are not a regular feature of
the landscape the way they would be for working mothers in the UK, and
childcare facilities generally do not keep long enough hours to enable a
parent to do a full-time job and pick up the child(ren) afterwards.
Part of this - I think - is because the shift from a traditional
extended-parent society to a nuclear family set-up has taken place too
quickly, and the compensatory social structures haven't had time to grow up.
But equally, because the changes have been so fast, many people (especially
those in power) are stuck in a mindset that's woefully out of date.
> Modern Japanese men are improving, but the ones in power tend to be the
> reactionary types that still believe that Koreans wanted to have Japanese
> names in WWII, and believe that the Japanese Imperial Army was a force of
> good, and that Japanese snow is different from gaijin snow.
Yes, I'm with you there, too. Even worse, they appear to be presiding over
Japan's slow decline, rather than trying to revitalise it through a
programme of economic and social reforms.
Apart from this idea about Japan being immature, it doesn't seem we have all
that much to disagree about.
Norman Diamond
> Unfortunately, this mindset, which brings into mind the thinking of sexist
> third world countries, seems to be accurately reported. Clearly, the
> Japanese have a LONG way to go before the reach maturity.
Try again. You've quoted Japanese GOVERNMENT officials. The Japanese
GOVERNMENT has a long way to go before reaching maturity.
Which, in fact, makes the Japanese government very little different from the
governments of most other countries.
What about yourself, by the way? When your president does something stupid,
do you say that you have a long way to go before reaching maturity? Or do
you figure out the difference between your government and your country's
ordinary people?
Rodney Webster
Ernest Schaal <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
> For instance, one reason given for the low birth rate in Japan is the
> male-dominated medical profession does not consider pain-control to be
> important in childbirth. My wife has told me that some women have told her
> that they would never give birth in Japan because the Japanese male-dominate
> medical profession dismisses their pain as unimportant.
Ernest plays his strongest card: his Japanese wife said it, so it must
be true.
BTW, have you ever considered the fact that birth has always been a
painful experience, and yet that did not stop women in the past from
having babies? In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't have
higher birth-rates in third world countries, or in the past, where/when
there is/was less access to pain-control medicines.
--
Rodney Webster
http://knot.mine.nu/
Eric Takabayashi
> Ernest Schaal wrote:
> > I agree that an "aging population" is a looming crisis, but that is due in
> > large part to the sexism that remains dominant in Japanese society.
>
> I wouldn't disagree out of hand, and am probably as upset as you are at the
> waste of human resources I see here in Japan. Even so, the fact that a few
> right-wing politicians have their heads stuck in the sand doesn't reflect
> the degree of maturity of the Japanese people
Then you aren't paying much attention to the attitudes of the general public
themselves when they respond in surveys for example, that they support
traditional gender roles, or the phenomenon of how women work part time for low
salaries (under 110 hours per month, and under 1.3 million per year, or what
have you) *specifically* to avoid paying higher taxes or being required to pay
for their own health and pension. I personally welcome the proposal to
eliminate exemptions for spouses, to encourage women to work more like men, and
reduce debt.
Eric Takabayashi
Japan facing enormous debt, up to a proposed 40% of salary withheld to pay pension premiums in the future
because there will not be enough working age people to support the elderly is a reality. Japan could also
do as the UN proposed and take in 600,000 foreign laborers per year for 50 years, but I seriously doubt the
public would accept that (or want them to actually stay when they have served their usefulness), even if
one short lived administration did allow it.
> I find it an interesting comment, though. No
> mention of women getting employment so they aren't on the dole
> anymore.
Yes, there should be more government and social support for women to encourage them to work. I hear that it
is quite hard to find child care in Tokyo, that some women even time their pregnancies according to future
availability of care, as well as one survey showing 46% of fathers in Tokyo returned home after 9 p.m., and
another showing how fathers put their jobs ahead of their families. However, in Fukuyama where there is
ample day care for children down to six weeks old, even 24 hour care available, there is not much to
discourage women from working. There are women who suffer discrimination who could probably sue for such
explicit statements by employers as they do not want the women because they are too old, or will get
married/have children and just quit, but there is also the vast majority of women, about two thirds, who
actually do quit when they have children, and more who quit when they plan on getting married, and those
who do not consider a career in the first place thinking they will live off their husbands or maybe
parents.
Eric Takabayashi
> "Ernest Schaal" <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote in message
> news:BB2C1834.4298%esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp...
>
> > Unfortunately, this mindset, which brings into mind the thinking of sexist
> > third world countries, seems to be accurately reported. Clearly, the
> > Japanese have a LONG way to go before the reach maturity.
>
> Try again. You've quoted Japanese GOVERNMENT officials. The Japanese
> GOVERNMENT has a long way to go before reaching maturity.
You've quoted LDP officials. LDP officials such as Mori have a long way to go.
The SDP or JCP, who often oppose them, are better.
> Which, in fact, makes the Japanese government very little different from the
> governments of most other countries.
>
> What about yourself, by the way? When your president does something stupid,
> do you say that you have a long way to go before reaching maturity? Or do
> you figure out the difference between your government and your country's
> ordinary people?
I personally didn't and wouldn't vote for Bush or his father. But there are
tens of millions who did, as well as a large majority of people who support the
current Bush and his policies. It could well be that such ardent supporters of
Bush and his policies could have a way to go.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> > I wouldn't disagree out of hand, and am probably as upset as you are at
the
> > waste of human resources I see here in Japan. Even so, the fact that a
few
> > right-wing politicians have their heads stuck in the sand doesn't
reflect
> > the degree of maturity of the Japanese people
and Eric Takabayashi replied:
> Then you aren't paying much attention to the attitudes of the general
public
> themselves when they respond in surveys for example, that they support
> traditional gender roles...
Eric, I'm sure there are many Japanese people - male and female - who on the
one hand think that Mori's comment was crass, but who, on the other hand do
not think exactly the same as politically-correct Westerners on this issue.
My basic point is that Western notions of political correctness are not the
be-all-and-end-all of "maturity".
I don't think that a society which has looked at these issues and come to a
different conclusion is therefore "immature". I lived in the south of Spain
for many years in a society that explicitly and specifically rejected
political correctness to a far greater extent than the Japanese do, but
there was no denying the sophisticated nature of that society.
> ...or the phenomenon of how women work part time for low
> salaries (under 110 hours per month, and under 1.3 million per year, or
> what have you) *specifically* to avoid paying higher taxes or being
> required to pay for their own health and pension.
I don't quite see your point. Surely this is an example of the waste of
human resources I was talking about? The system discourages them from
pursuing a career, right? That's precisely what I was driving at.
> I personally welcome the proposal to eliminate
> exemptions for spouses, to encourage women to work more like
> men, and reduce debt.
Well, this seems to me to be an entirely different issue, but since you
bring it up my initial reaction is that, unless it is one measure in a
well-thought-out package of measures, I imagine the result would be that for
every one women it spurs on to say, "OK, I'll work full-time and make a
proper career out of it" there will be twenty who will say, "Heck, I was
working for peanuts before, but at least they were tax-free peanuts. If I've
got to pay tax on it it's just not worth the bother". Of course, it might
encourage some of them to go on the game, but that could result in some
nasty turf wars with the Chinese girls who at present appear to have
cornered the lion's share of the market and, since it would, by its nature,
be the exact opposite of working "more like men", this is clearly not what
you had in mind.
No, as I see it, by such a measure Japan would lose its biggest source of
cheap labour in one fell swoop and either there'd be a huge influx of cheap
foreign labour to fill the gap (plus - if such a thing is possible! - even
more hairdressers, etc., for the newly-idle women to hang out in) or
Japanese companies would move even more of their operations abroad,
resulting in even greater job losses.
Eric Takabayashi
> In article <BB2C5EB0.42C4%esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp>,
> Ernest Schaal <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
>
> > For instance, one reason given for the low birth rate in Japan is the
> > male-dominated medical profession does not consider pain-control to be
> > important in childbirth. My wife has told me that some women have told her
> > that they would never give birth in Japan because the Japanese male-dominate
> > medical profession dismisses their pain as unimportant.
>
> Ernest plays his strongest card: his Japanese wife said it, so it must
> be true.
I've heard of the women who do not like regular practices such as shaving, enema,
and cutting, and would consider childbirth elsewhere. A rise in and success of
"boutique" maternity clinics which are more like hotels with personalized service
for not much more money than a regular hospital, is one response to such women's
desires. I did not witness any of those things, but I've seen and heard weird
things in maternity hospitals here, like denying the baby contact with the mother
for 24 hours, and keeping the baby in a separate room with the mother for three
days or more.
Japanese women like my wife claim not to understand how doctors in the US would
use anesthetic or put women under, allegedly not switching on the "mommy" switch
in the brain. I've seen at least one long segment on TV discussing this, claiming
it was one reason for child abuse in the US.
Eric Takabayashi
It is not "the system" which is to be blamed for women CHOOSING not to work.
Women in the US pay taxes, but they are much more willing to work or even
support themselves.
> > I personally welcome the proposal to eliminate
> > exemptions for spouses, to encourage women to work more like
> > men, and reduce debt.
>
> Well, this seems to me to be an entirely different issue, but since you
> bring it up my initial reaction is that, unless it is one measure in a
> well-thought-out package of measures, I imagine the result would be that for
> every one women it spurs on to say, "OK, I'll work full-time and make a
> proper career out of it" there will be twenty who will say, "Heck, I was
> working for peanuts before, but at least they were tax-free peanuts. If I've
> got to pay tax on it it's just not worth the bother".
Ah. You do have suspicions of how women behave in Japan. But you misunderstand:
They WOULD bother to make their own damned money if it meant women NOT
collecting government pension or not getting 70% subsidized medical service.
Under the current system, one woman in the news calculated she would have to
earn 1.7 million per year, IIRC, to take home as much as she did earning less
than 1.3 million in a lower tax bracket.
I don't know about you, but I certainly don't know MEN to deliberately keep
their work hours or salaries down (also hindering their career opportunities)
just to avoid paying tax. I don't know working age men who have a real choice
about working or not at all. Even the rich ones work to keep their family
businesses going, or find something else to do if they sell.
> Of course, it might
> encourage some of them to go on the game, but that could result in some
> nasty turf wars with the Chinese girls who at present appear to have
> cornered the lion's share of the market
What market are you referring to which Chinese women dominate? I'm talking
about Japanese women working like Japanese men at comparable positions and
salaries and benefits, like women in other industrialized countries do.
> and, since it would, by its nature,
> be the exact opposite of working "more like men", this is clearly not what
> you had in mind.
In Japan's case, if women from their end reduced the gap between how men and
women worked, men would also be able to work less, and have more leisure and
time for domestic chores. Northern European countries such as Norway have
reduced many such discrepancies between men and women. So much so that there is
actually worry in Norway that women no longer "need" men to raise a family,
and there is a rise in single motherhood.
> No, as I see it, by such a measure Japan would lose its biggest source of
> cheap labour in one fell swoop
If women worked more, for more money, men could work less, for lower salaries,
and families would still make it, like in Norway. Men would also do more
domestic chores, as they do in other industrialized countries. I think what I
read just last month claimed husbands in Finland spent four hours per day on
housework and child care, and husbands in Japan were down at about 20 minutes.
The little article I read did not report how much housework the women were
doing.
> and either there'd be a huge influx of cheap
> foreign labour to fill the gap
There wouldn't be enough foreigners allowed to fill the gap. The UN estimates
Japan needs an influx of 600,000 laborers *per year*, for 50 years, to maintain
Japan's economy in the face of population decline.
Japanese students could be allowed to work, as they do in other countries, to
supply low cost or low skill labor in part time jobs. That would encourage them
to stop living off their parents, too, and lead to more responsible saving and
spending. There'd be a lot fewer idle young Japanese if they paid for their own
education or living expenses like many foreigners did.
> (plus - if such a thing is possible! - even
> more hairdressers, etc., for the newly-idle women to hang out in)
That is correct. Leisure is one sector with potential for growth. It would
*create* jobs, because I don't see many Chinese girls working at Disneyland, in
the Louis Vuitton stores, or as bus guides.
> or
> Japanese companies would move even more of their operations abroad,
> resulting in even greater job losses.
There are still things that low cost foreign labor cannot do. Japanese need to
promote growth in such areas as high technology and service.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> It is not "the system" which is to be blamed for women CHOOSING not to
work.
> Women in the US pay taxes, but they are much more willing to work or even
> support themselves.
Eric, women are not choosing *not* to work. What they are doing is choosing
to keep their income below a certain threshold, determined by the state, in
order not to get into a situation where they earn more, but get taxed on it
and so end up pocketing less. In other words, they are making a perfectly
logical choice, based on the options the system is offering them.
> They WOULD bother to make their own damned money if it meant women NOT
> collecting government pension or not getting 70% subsidized medical
service.
Yup. That would certainly put the cat among the pigeons. The average
salaryman with a non-working partner would probably be sufficiently incensed
to abandon his reputation for being a patient, long-suffering soul and
embark upon armed dismantlement of the state. Otherwise, no problem.
> Under the current system, one woman in the news calculated she would have
to
> earn 1.7 million per year, IIRC, to take home as much as she did earning
less
> than 1.3 million in a lower tax bracket.
Absolutely. Now you're saying it yourself, "Under the current system". See?
It *is* the system that's creating this situation, isn't it?
> I don't know about you, but I certainly don't know MEN to deliberately
keep
> their work hours or salaries down (also hindering their career
opportunities)
> just to avoid paying tax. I don't know working age men who have a real
choice
> about working or not at all.
Then you don't know about poverty traps, about people who stay on welfare
because a low-end job would involve getting to work on time each day,
working all day and receiving only a paltry amount extra, which would mostly
go on things like transport to work and spending the necessary extra on
clothing, etc.
> > Of course, it might
> > encourage some of them to go on the game, but that could result in some
> > nasty turf wars with the Chinese girls who at present appear to have
> > cornered the lion's share of the market
>
> What market are you referring to which Chinese women dominate?
Sorry, Eric. "The game" is a longstanding euphemism for prostitution.
> In Japan's case, if women from their end reduced the gap between how men
and
> women worked, men would also be able to work less, and have more leisure
and
> time for domestic chores. Northern European countries such as Norway have
> reduced many such discrepancies between men and women.
Well, yes, but what works in one society won't always work in another. You
might as well recommend the US to adopt Norway's laws on control of firearms
as recommend Japan to adopt Norway's policies on the employment of women.
> So much so that there is actually
> worry in Norway that women no longer "need" men to raise a family,
> and there is a rise in single motherhood.
There you go, you see. Every silver lining has a cloud. Japanese women have
their problems, and - for all their "maturity" - Norwegian men have theirs.
Now here you're simply talking out of the top of your head. The number of
hours spent by Japanese students doing "baito" (= part-time jobs) is already
worrying enough. Some of them are running so close to exhaustion all the
time it's just as well some of the lectures are as boring as they are, and
the lecturers don't even try to wake the kids up as they try to catch up on
their beauty sleep.
I not infrequently am asked to write recommendations for students to receive
financial help as it is - the family business that's failed, the student
that's working three nights a week for the family business and holding down
a part-time job as well as trying to study....Your policies would ensure
they didn't get a university education at all.
> There'd be a lot fewer idle young Japanese if they paid for their own
> education or living expenses like many foreigners did.
Poor kids! Their childhood has been sacrificed on the altar of entrance
examinations, their future is in thrall to some corporate magnate, and you
want to deprive them of the little bit of breathing space they get
inbetween!
> Leisure is one sector with potential for growth. It would *create*
> jobs, because I don't see many Chinese girls working at Disneyland, in
> the Louis Vuitton stores, or as bus guides.
Well, then, by all means let's give people more leisure. The problem is, the
steps taken to do that so far seem largely to have failed. For instance, the
Ministry of Education has introduced the five-day week for schoolchildren,
and all that's done is create growth in the cram school sector (not to
mention schools cutting sports events, etc., to make up for the loss of
classtime). If they did something positive, like have students at one school
for the bulk of their school years, so that they weren't spending all their
time at one school preparing for examinations to get them into the next one,
we might see some progress.
> There are still things that low cost foreign labor cannot do. Japanese
need to
> promote growth in such areas as high technology and service.
Japan is already one of the countries on the cutting edge of high technology
and its service industry is like heaven after the UK, but I won't get into
all that as you seem to have a different agenda from that which drew me into
this thread. My points are as follows: (1) different societies follow
different roads to progress, (2) holding up models that work in one society
is no guarantee that they will work in another society and (3) these
differences between societies do not have anything to do with one society
being any more or less "mature" than any other.
Kevin Gowen
> In article <BB2C5EB0.42C4%esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp>,
> Ernest Schaal <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
>
>> For instance, one reason given for the low birth rate in Japan is the
>> male-dominated medical profession does not consider pain-control to
>> be important in childbirth. My wife has told me that some women have
>> told her that they would never give birth in Japan because the
>> Japanese male-dominate medical profession dismisses their pain as
>> unimportant.
>
> Ernest plays his strongest card: his Japanese wife said it, so it must
> be true.
>
> BTW, have you ever considered the fact that birth has always been a
> painful experience, and yet that did not stop women in the past from
> having babies? In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't have
> higher birth-rates in third world countries,
Then allow me to not surprise you. I've seen hard numbers on the topic but
this should do for now:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/1194030.stm
The annual world population growth rate is 1.3% - about 77m people a year.
Six countries - India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh and Indonesia -
account for half that total.
India has introduced a new population policy aimed at stabilising its
numbers by 2045 - by which time it is expected to be the most populous
country on earth.
Many richer countries, on the other hand - such as Japan, Germany, Italy and
Hungary - are expected to see marked declines in their populations over the
next 50 years.
Russia, Ukraine and Georgia will also experience sharp drops in population.
And with low birth rates in rich countries, only immigration will keep their
populations from falling, the report says.
By contrast the number of people living in the 48 least developed countries
in the world is expected to triple by the year 2050.
> or in the past,
> where/when
> there is/was less access to pain-control medicines.
--
Kevin Gowen
"The US economy accounts for about one-third of global GDP-greater than
the next four countries combined (Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom
and France)."
- "Advancing the National Interest: Australia's Foreign and Trade
Policy White Paper", Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>
> > It is not "the system" which is to be blamed for women CHOOSING not to
> work.
> > Women in the US pay taxes, but they are much more willing to work or even
> > support themselves.
>
> Eric, women are not choosing *not* to work.
It is when they are not working, and there is not something to stop them from
doing so, such as discrimination or pressing domestic chores such as caring for
children or homebound elderly relatives. I can certainly see why a woman with
small children might be a housewife, but not a woman without children or with
children who can look after themselves. God man, I know women who do not even
do housework (maybe their live in mother or mother in law does it, yet they
have no jobs and bitch about life, the economy, or their husbands and their
jobs.
> What they are doing is choosing
> to keep their income below a certain threshold, determined by the state, in
> order not to get into a situation where they earn more, but get taxed on it
> and so end up pocketing less. In other words, they are making a perfectly
> logical choice, based on the options the system is offering them.
Or they could do like women in other countries, or like men do, and work more
to get more money. I don't avoid work to stay out of the next tax bracket, and
other than women in Japan, I don't know people who do. None who'd admit it,
anyway. I know part time and freeter men. They don't hold themselves down to
avoid taxes.
> > They WOULD bother to make their own damned money if it meant women NOT
> > collecting government pension or not getting 70% subsidized medical
> service.
>
> Yup. That would certainly put the cat among the pigeons. The average
> salaryman with a non-working partner would probably be sufficiently incensed
> to abandon his reputation for being a patient, long-suffering soul and
> embark upon armed dismantlement of the state. Otherwise, no problem.
Excuse me? Unless women earned their own money and made their own payments,
they would not get benefits. The same situation breadwinner men are in. But men
don't have a problem with working to support themselves despite paying taxes.
Women should learn it too.
> > Under the current system, one woman in the news calculated she would have
> to
> > earn 1.7 million per year, IIRC, to take home as much as she did earning
> less
> > than 1.3 million in a lower tax bracket.
>
> Absolutely. Now you're saying it yourself, "Under the current system". See?
> It *is* the system that's creating this situation, isn't it?
No, it's one woman being lazy. If men want more money, they work more or get
another job. I do. I don't sit on my ass while my wife works.
> > I don't know about you, but I certainly don't know MEN to deliberately
> keep
> > their work hours or salaries down (also hindering their career
> opportunities)
> > just to avoid paying tax. I don't know working age men who have a real
> choice
> > about working or not at all.
>
> Then you don't know about poverty traps,
What poverty traps in Japan are you referring to? I see discrimination against
women, and middle aged or elderly men, preventing them from working. The
problem I am talking about is with people who do have choices who hold
themselves down, yet may still bitch about it.
> about people who stay on welfare
> because a low-end job would involve getting to work on time each day,
> working all day and receiving only a paltry amount extra, which would mostly
> go on things like transport to work and spending the necessary extra on
> clothing, etc.
According to one international survey in perhaps 32 countries, including in the
developing world, only 4% of Japanese respondents did not have enough to pay
for food, shelter, medicine, etc., the lowest rate of the countries surveyed.
The level of hardship in the US was 15%. You'll notice Japanese level of
homelessness is also much lower than in the US, about one tenth the population.
And Japanese homeless can make do without panhandling. The most serious
complaint I personally have against any homeless in Japan I have ever seen is
recently, more of them seem to be unclean or have some sort of smell. And the
homeless community I see nearly every day seems to have lost their aversion to
using the public area, supposedly a playground under the elevated train tracks,
as their open air toilet, so the immediate area reeks of urine.
> > > Of course, it might
> > > encourage some of them to go on the game, but that could result in some
> > > nasty turf wars with the Chinese girls who at present appear to have
> > > cornered the lion's share of the market
> >
> > What market are you referring to which Chinese women dominate?
>
> Sorry, Eric. "The game" is a longstanding euphemism for prostitution.
Then foreign women are hardly dominant in that area. In fact, since coming to
Japan, I have begun to understand what one feminist writer meant when she
called marriage a form of prostitution. Women will even tell me proverbs such
as, the best husband is not at home, or tell me how happy they are that their
husbands are not around, or the hell they have to go through with their sick or
retired husbands. They'd be divorced if they weren't more worried about not
getting their husbands' money.
> > In Japan's case, if women from their end reduced the gap between how men
> and
> > women worked, men would also be able to work less, and have more leisure
> and
> > time for domestic chores. Northern European countries such as Norway have
> > reduced many such discrepancies between men and women.
>
> Well, yes, but what works in one society won't always work in another. You
> might as well recommend the US to adopt Norway's laws on control of firearms
> as recommend Japan to adopt Norway's policies on the employment of women.
Why is the gun situation in the US, which is notable in the world, analogous to
the Japanese situation on employment for women, which is hardly uncommon among
traditional or past societies? Even the US had a similar situation in my
parents' generation, and it was even more serious in decades and centuries
before.
Unless you are referring to the fact that unlike elsewhere, Japanese women are
not acting for themselves. There have been figures fighting for women's rights
in the US since at least the mid 19th century, putting themselves at risk,
being harassed, mobbed, and jailed.
> > So much so that there is actually
> > worry in Norway that women no longer "need" men to raise a family,
> > and there is a rise in single motherhood.
>
> There you go, you see. Every silver lining has a cloud. Japanese women have
> their problems, and - for all their "maturity" - Norwegian men have theirs.
I am not the one who claims that single mothers who work and raise a family are
any sort of problem. It's better than being trapped in an unhappy marriage like
many Japanese women will explicitly tell me. It is no wonder to me that the
elderly are the fastest rising group of divorcees in Japan, and it's the women
dumping the surprised husbands.
No, I've believed that Japanese children and young people should be more
responsible and independent for quite some time, and it is true.
> The number of
> hours spent by Japanese students doing "baito" (= part-time jobs) is already
> worrying enough.
I refer to high school students. You know, ALL the ones not allowed to work by
their school rules, thus having to get sometimes obscene amounts from their
poor parents every month to support a telephone, karaoke, or fashion habit.
> Some of them are running so close to exhaustion all the
> time it's just as well some of the lectures are as boring as they are, and
> the lecturers don't even try to wake the kids up as they try to catch up on
> their beauty sleep.
Then they need to manage their time like students in other countries who are
more independent from their parents, do. And as for high school students and
entrance exams, Japanese will need to learn sooner or later that those
examinations are not what determine the quality of a worker or a person. Also
in the US, there are part time study programs for people who are busy or do not
have much money up front.
> I not infrequently am asked to write recommendations for students to receive
> financial help as it is - the family business that's failed, the student
> that's working three nights a week for the family business and holding down
> a part-time job as well as trying to study....Your policies would ensure
> they didn't get a university education at all.
Wrong. Because I would help honest, hardworking people including those in
"poverty traps" or those who are somehow unemployable without enough money.
This view of mine that people should be helped is precisely what irritates
people who pay more tax or those who are more politically conservative.
> > There'd be a lot fewer idle young Japanese if they paid for their own
> > education or living expenses like many foreigners did.
>
> Poor kids! Their childhood has been sacrificed on the altar of entrance
> examinations,
That's a mistake to begin with. I would do away with those. Grades and other
than academic achievements, such as demonstrations of leadership and
extracurricular activity, are more important.
> their future is in thrall to some corporate magnate,
They should do away with that corporate structure, too. The economy is having
that effect. Economic instability is making millions of Japanese start to take
charge of themselves. Thank god.
> and you
> want to deprive them of the little bit of breathing space they get
> inbetween!
Of course you realize you are taking pity on those students who actually do
study. I know some high school students who sleep five hours a night, don't
meet their families at night, and don't watch TV because they study so much.
Well that's a mistake to begin with. But most students are not like that.
Students in other countries who hold down part time jobs while studying are
also cutting into their free time, if you have forgotten. I knew kids who paid
their own rent (perhaps even to their own parents) and tuitions, were already
independent adults, or perhaps are still paying off loans now. They dealt with
it.
> > Leisure is one sector with potential for growth. It would *create*
> > jobs, because I don't see many Chinese girls working at Disneyland, in
> > the Louis Vuitton stores, or as bus guides.
>
> Well, then, by all means let's give people more leisure.
That's why you needn't worry about Japanese studying or working themselves too
hard. They are beginning to decide for themselves that it is not the way. The
problem is some take it too far, dropping out of school because they simply
don't feel like going (note, I am NOT referring to or criticizing victims of
harassment), or adults going completely without work and becoming parasites
because they may be disillusioned or confused about their futures. According to
government figures 70% of unemployed people quit their jobs by choice. Of
course that includes people who were bullied to avoid paying severance, but
those people are not the problem. I refer to the people who will explicitly
tell people that they quit their jobs to take a rest, travel abroad, etc. - on
the dole. Just this week a woman told me she would "rest" and collect
unemployment before following my suggestion of a place to find precisely the
kind of work she wanted. In my experience of hundreds of such unemployed
people, easily 95% are women. Can't imagine more than say, five men who would
actually admit doing so. No, the men are too busy working and trying to take
care of themselves or support their families to muse about sitting on their
asses living off their wives' efforts.
> The problem is, the
> steps taken to do that so far seem largely to have failed. For instance, the
> Ministry of Education has introduced the five-day week for schoolchildren,
> and all that's done is create growth in the cram school sector (not to
> mention schools cutting sports events, etc., to make up for the loss of
> classtime).
Then those parents need to get it into their heads that grades and the name of
the school are not what matters. They should realize from the problems of the
last decade that more is needed in the home to raise children properly instead
of foisting the children and their problems on the schools.
> If they did something positive, like have students at one school for the bulk
> of their school years, so that they weren't spending all their time at one
> school preparing for examinations to get them into the next one, we might see
> some progress.
I am for district schooling. I am for public schooling. I would also be for
school vouchers and waivers for those in financial need. Particularly at the
elementary and junior high level, Japanese do not understand the concept of
having many levels of ability within the same school, preferring children to
travel perhaps hours each way, or having to live away from their families and
childhood friends, just to go to a "good" high school with a good program,
instead of having their free local schools improve.
> > There are still things that low cost foreign labor cannot do. Japanese
> need to
> > promote growth in such areas as high technology and service.
>
> Japan is already one of the countries on the cutting edge of high technology
> and its service industry is like heaven after the UK,
Funny, that is not what the Japanese are saying about themselves when they look
to foreigners and foreign countries for new ways of doing business. Look at how
just last month, one American president of a Japanese bank for the first time
ever in Japan, *gasp* offered service on weekends.
> but I won't get into
> all that as you seem to have a different agenda from that which drew me into
> this thread. My points are as follows: (1) different societies follow
> different roads to progress,
Yes, but it is not always necessary for the roads to be different. Enforcing
rights for women and instilling a sense of responsibility will improve the
situation of women in Japan. As a matter of fact, progress has already been
made.
> (2) holding up models that work in one society
> is no guarantee that they will work in another society
Yes, but that is no reason that "foreign" ways of dealing with women's rights
are unnecessary, incorrect or ineffective in Japan. If you'd seen the US
decades ago, you'd have said the same thing, but the US situation improved and
continues to improve, as it does in Japan. It's just that Japan is decades
behind the West in this regard, and the attitudes of women themselves don't
help much.
> and (3) these
> differences between societies do not have anything to do with one society
> being any more or less "mature" than any other.
That is your agenda, but I am talking only about women and those choices that
they do make to hold themselves down. Until the women stop holding themselves
down, there is not much incentive including legal means, for society or
employers to change to suit them.
Eric Takabayashi
> And with low birth rates in rich countries, only immigration will keep their
> populations from falling, the report says.
>
> By contrast the number of people living in the 48 least developed countries
> in the world is expected to triple by the year 2050.
Then there are ample employment opportunities providing care for those in the
modern industrialized world. I've also seen a Japanese program promoting
retirement abroad. Full service such as a private nurse, convenience, a local
Japanese community, and supposedly good security for 100,000 yen or even less
per month in urban Thailand. That was the low end. Those with more money like
250,000 yen per month, could go off to Europe or Australia. If it were
reasonably safe, I'd happily retire in a developing country like my grandmother
in the Philippines, to save money, live well in a more traditional society, and
help locals, too.
Ernest Schaal
ndia...@nospam.wta.att.ne.jp wrote on 7/5/03 8:29 PM:
This time I quoted Japanese government officials, but other news articles I
have read have shown that Japanese businessmen are just as bad, and that
Japanese schoolteachers really have a problem keeping their hands off their
students.
As for your remark about the president, that is one man. The wave of
Japanese political scandals involve a multitude of men.
Ernest Schaal
Webster at rgw_n...@knot.mine.nu wrote on 7/5/03 9:36 PM:
Actually, I heard it from a variety of sources, including my wife, a friend,
and an opinion article in the Japan Times.
As to your point about the third world countries, social customs have an
overpowering force there. In Japan, social customs are weakening, and
Japanese women have woke up to the fact that they have choices, including
the choice not to have children if that means having them without pain
medication. It is similar to the Indian women who are waking up to their
choices and are fight back against brutal Indian customs, like burning wives
who don't bring enough dowry.
Kevin Gowen
> In Japan, social customs are weakening,
Please let us know when you decide to visit Japan.
Ernest Schaal
jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com wrote on 7/5/03 10:26 PM:
> Eric, I'm sure there are many Japanese people - male and female - who on the
> one hand think that Mori's comment was crass, but who, on the other hand do
> not think exactly the same as politically-correct Westerners on this issue.
> My basic point is that Western notions of political correctness are not the
> be-all-and-end-all of "maturity".
John, you use the term political correctness in a way that makes me wonder
if you know what the term means. Political correctness refers to the use of
euphemisms and failing to discuss real issues in order to avoid offending
the feelings of specific minority groups. For instance, it is not
politically correct to say that fat people are often fat because they are
always stuffing their faces with food. Instead, one who is "PC" would either
say that the weight-challenged have issues with food intake or would ignore
the whole topic altogether.
> I don't think that a society which has looked at these issues and come to a
> different conclusion is therefore "immature". I lived in the south of Spain
> for many years in a society that explicitly and specifically rejected
> political correctness to a far greater extent than the Japanese do, but
> there was no denying the sophisticated nature of that society.
As to the maturity issue, I was discussing the trend of social behavior away
from a paternal, condescending view of women to a view of equality of the
sexes. It isn't that Japanese, as a whole, are rejecting that trend. Instead
they are less advanced (less mature) in the development in sexual equality.
John W.
> "John W." wrote:
>
>
> > I find it an interesting comment, though. No
> > mention of women getting employment so they aren't on the dole
> > anymore.
>
> ample day care for children down to six weeks old, even 24 hour care
> available, there is not much to
> discourage women from working. There are women who suffer discrimination who
> could probably sue for such
> explicit statements by employers as they do not want the women because they
> are too old, or will get
> married/have children and just quit, but there is also the vast majority of
> women, about two thirds, who
> actually do quit when they have children, and more who quit when they plan
> on getting married, and those
> who do not consider a career in the first place thinking they will live off
> their husbands or maybe
> parents.
Well, in the case of my sister-in-law she fits into the wanted to work
until she had kids category, mainly because from the get go she pretty
much figured there wasn't much chance of a career (and she is just as
strong willed and determined as my wife, and she would have *liked* a
career). This view was solidified after she graduated near the top of
her class from a good junior college in Osaka (don't know which one).
Her first job was with a nice prestigious bank's Himeji branch. While
there was some equality in terms of job, at least at the beginning;
there were men categorized exactly the same as her. Yet she HAD to go
to work 15 minutes early every morning to get coffee/tea ready, and
HAD to make coffee/tea for every meeting of her group, along with the
other token ladies on the "career" track. After a year or so it was
obvious that this situation wasn't going to change, so she decided to
settle down and be a mom. I tell this story because I feel it's a damn
shame that Japan lost a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and
capable member of the work force simply because her company's male
employees were incapable of making their own damn tea. Note that this
male mindset is the reason that I most likely will never get to
permanently live in Japan again, because my wife knows she can succeed
faster and more easily in America.
John W.
John W.
>
> Then you aren't paying much attention to the attitudes of the general public
> themselves when they respond in surveys for example, that they support
> traditional gender roles
Once I wrote a graduate thesis on a topic similar to this. Sigh.
John W.
Kevin Gowen
Should we take that sigh to mean that there is something dismaying about
traditional gender roles?
Kevin Gowen
> Well, in the case of my sister-in-law she fits into the wanted to work
> until she had kids category, mainly because from the get go she pretty
> much figured there wasn't much chance of a career (and she is just as
> strong willed and determined as my wife, and she would have *liked* a
> career). This view was solidified after she graduated near the top of
> her class from a good junior college in Osaka (don't know which one).
> Her first job was with a nice prestigious bank's Himeji branch. While
> there was some equality in terms of job, at least at the beginning;
> there were men categorized exactly the same as her. Yet she HAD to go
> to work 15 minutes early every morning to get coffee/tea ready, and
> HAD to make coffee/tea for every meeting of her group, along with the
> other token ladies on the "career" track. After a year or so it was
> obvious that this situation wasn't going to change, so she decided to
> settle down and be a mom. I tell this story because I feel it's a damn
> shame that Japan lost a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and
> capable member of the work force simply because her company's male
> employees were incapable of making their own damn tea. Note that this
> male mindset is the reason that I most likely will never get to
> permanently live in Japan again, because my wife knows she can succeed
> faster and more easily in America.
While this story is unfortunate, the upside is that your nieces/nephews have
gained a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and capable mother.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> if you know what the term means. Political correctness refers to the use
of
> euphemisms and failing to discuss real issues in order to avoid offending
> the feelings of specific minority groups. For instance, it is not
> politically correct to say that fat people are often fat because they are
> always stuffing their faces with food. Instead, one who is "PC" would
either
> say that the weight-challenged have issues with food intake or would
ignore
> the whole topic altogether.
You mean in your country or culture the concept of political correctness has
not been extended to refer to "unreconstructed" views in general?
> As to the maturity issue, I was discussing the trend of social behavior
away
> from a paternal, condescending view of women to a view of equality of the
> sexes. It isn't that Japanese, as a whole, are rejecting that trend.
Instead
> they are less advanced (less mature) in the development in sexual
equality.
OK, I suppose. It just looked, from where I was sitting, like a rather
unreconstructed attack on the unreconstructed. Even phrased more carefully,
as above, I don't feel completely at ease with it, but I can, at least, see
where you're coming from.
Ernest Schaal
jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com wrote on 7/6/03 8:24 AM:
>> John, you use the term political correctness in a way that makes me wonder if
>> you know what the term means. Political correctness refers to the use of
>> euphemisms and failing to discuss real issues in order to avoid offending the
>> feelings of specific minority groups. For instance, it is not politically
>> correct to say that fat people are often fat because they are always stuffing
>> their faces with food. Instead, one who is "PC" would either say that the
>> weight-challenged have issues with food intake or would ignore the whole
>> topic altogether.
>
> You mean in your country or culture the concept of political correctness has
> not been extended to refer to "unreconstructed" views in general?
No
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> God man, I know women who do not even
> do housework (maybe their live in mother or mother in law does it,
> yet they have no jobs and bitch about life, the economy, or their
> husbands and their jobs.
But we were specifically talking about those who do work but take care to
keep their income below the tax threshold.
> Unless women earned their own money and made their own payments,
> they would not get benefits. The same situation breadwinner men are in.
But men
> don't have a problem with working to support themselves despite paying
taxes.
> Women should learn it too.
But what do you think would happen in reality? Do you think all the women
who are currently covered via their husband's insurance will suddenly rush
out and get work? Don't you think that many of them would simply become an
unacceptably heavy burden on their husbands who, as I say, would resent this
and bitterly oppose such a move?
> What poverty traps in Japan are you referring to?
I wasn't referring specifically to Japan. You ask for parallels, and I can
give you plenty, one being the way I've seen some people (mainly in the UK)
actually *choose* the dole over a low-paid job because working simply wasn't
worth the candle. Another parallel from the UK would be the fact that there
there is a threshold above which inheritances are liable for death duties,
and people respond by doing their damnedest to give away as much of their
money as possible before dying in order to be below the threshold and avoid
the duty.
> You'll notice Japanese level of homelessness is also
> much lower than in the US, about one tenth the population.
God, is it really as high as that in the US? That's appalling.
> > > What market are you referring to which Chinese women dominate?
> >
> > Sorry, Eric. "The game" is a longstanding euphemism for prostitution.
>
> Then foreign women are hardly dominant in that area.
Well, when I get off the train at night I have to run the gamut of up to a
dozen Chinese prostitutes just to get from the railway station to the bus
station. Your mileage may differ.
> Women will even tell me proverbs such as, the best
> husband is not at home, or tell me how happy they are that their
> husbands are not around, or the hell they have to go through with
> their sick or retired husbands. They'd be divorced if they weren't
> more worried about not getting their husbands' money.
Well, and others will tell me that they have to place their husband's
slippers just so at the entrance when he comes home, have his newspaper in
place, serve him tea or coffee at his whim and the closest he ever gets to
communicating with her is grunting, partly because he is exhausted after
another twelve-hour working day. Having sacrificed their lives to propping
up their husbands as the backbone of the Japanese economy, surely they are
entitled to health treatment and some kind of pension?
> unlike elsewhere, Japanese women are not acting for
> themselves. There have been figures fighting for women's rights
> in the US since at least the mid 19th century, putting themselves at risk,
> being harassed, mobbed, and jailed.
Well, perhaps Japanese society (and in particular its women) wants different
things, and forcing them to eat the same pie as the Sepponians simply isn't
appropriate?
> > Poor kids! Their childhood has been sacrificed on the altar of entrance
> > examinations,
>
> That's a mistake to begin with. I would do away with those. Grades and
other
> than academic achievements, such as demonstrations of leadership and
> extracurricular activity, are more important.
>
> > their future is in thrall to some corporate magnate,
>
> They should do away with that corporate structure, too. The economy is
having
> that effect. Economic instability is making millions of Japanese start to
take
> charge of themselves. Thank god.
OK, so you have a package, one that would affect every aspect of Japanese
society, not simply a one-off proposal to cut benefits for non-working women
. All you need now is to get yourself elected, or bend the ear of those in
power, and Bob's your uncle!
> > My points are as follows: (1) different societies follow
> > different roads to progress,
> > (2) holding up models that work in one society
> > is no guarantee that they will work in another society
> > and (3) these differences
> > between societies do not have anything to do with one society
> > being any more or less "mature" than any other.
>
> That is your agenda
No, it's my response to the original poster.
Kevin Gowen
> Eric Takabayashi wrote
>> much lower than in the US, about one tenth the population.
>
> God, is it really as high as that in the US?
No.
http://www.nscahh.org/hunger.asp?id2=8802
"Experts estimate that 3 million people in the United States are homeless
each year."
The population of the US is 291,426,578 according to census.gov. You do the
math.
Of course, by definition, can Japan have any homeless people? After all, if
they don't have a 住民票 they don't live in Japan, right?
Eric Takabayashi
> John Yamamoto-Wilson wrote:
> > Eric Takabayashi wrote
> >> You'll notice Japanese level of homelessness is also
> >> much lower than in the US, about one tenth the population.
> >
> > God, is it really as high as that in the US?
>
> No.
Ah. No, sorry. The number of homeless in Japan are about one tenth the
homeless in the US. I've seen more permanent homeless estimated about 300,000
in the US.
Eric Takabayashi
How long did it take you to find that out? The newspaper found it out by interviewing a few
thousand people.
Unfortunately in Japan, surveys do not seem to carry a margin of error, which is why people are
able to complain to me that it is only what some people said. In the US if CNN or TIME telephone a
few thousand people, they'll get it within three or four percent of what is estimated of the
entire population.
Eric Takabayashi
> John W. wrote:
> > Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> > news:<3F06C8B8...@yahoo.co.jp>...
> >>
> >> Then you aren't paying much attention to the attitudes of the
> >> general public
> >> themselves when they respond in surveys for example, that they
> >> support
> >> traditional gender roles
> >
> > Once I wrote a graduate thesis on a topic similar to this. Sigh.
>
> Should we take that sigh to mean that there is something dismaying about
> traditional gender roles?
I believe women are most fit for early child care because they have the
equipment, but it does not mean women should be required to stay home or
men should make most of the money. It is kind of sad to see that mizu
shobai places are the ones instituting 24 hour child care, flexible
schedules, and providing houses and cover stories, to encourage single
women or single mothers to work.
Eric Takabayashi
Then that is precisely one of the wrong companies to work at, and pardon me, people who want
serious careers may want more than a junior college education, no matter how famous it may be. On
the other hand, my home town college has a two year program to get an RN, with a passing rate up
to 90%, and salaries higher than public school teachers, which I will look into when I go home.
Junior college grads were on the "career" track? I've seen ads in the national newspaper
advertising junior HIGH grads to be OLs. Junior high grads (or high school students) are also
capable of getting the same part time jobs as university educated women such as cashier in the
supermarket, and unlike say at McDonald's or 7-11, the wage may be exactly the same regardless of
education or age.
> After a year or so it was
> obvious that this situation wasn't going to change,
Why did it take one year to find that out?
> so she decided to settle down and be a mom.
Why did she not look for another job after just one year? My wife is a victim of discrimination,
and she's now 35 with two kids, but she continues to study for national exams for a full time
office job or home work, while getting money at a crap job. I know women who are not so fresh out
of school, yet have not given up on work or further study. I applaud them. I did not give up on a
job search after about 14 months unemployed, either, and neither did you. The vast majority of men
have no choice about working at all, no matter how crappy the job, salary, or the economy.
This is one of the important differences between men and women as seen in Japan.
> I tell this story because I feel it's a damn
> shame that Japan lost a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and
> capable member of the work force
But unfortunately not willing to stick a situation out or look for a job longer than a year. If
the market were so stacked against me, as it indeed is now after ten years in Japan, I would go
back to school for a new education, and look for a new job, even if it means starting a totally
brand new career such as nursing as a man at 40 with a wife and two children to support. I see
what laid off men, or men who quit unsatisfying jobs in mid career do. Another difference between
men and women in Japan.
> simply because her company's male
> employees were incapable of making their own damn tea.
Then aren't you glad that self service and vending machines in the workplace are catching on, or
that women may now successfully sue for sexual discrimination?
> Note that this male mindset
Note the FEMALE mindset when giving up on work after one year, or ONLY getting a junior college
education, not sticking out crap jobs or job searches or pursuing competitive university education
like the men, and not working the same hours, sometimes to the detriment of their health. Major
reasons for the obvious differences in "men's" work and "women's" work in Japan. It is wrong to
discriminate against an applicant just because she is a woman before giving her a chance, but men
and women are quite different in Japan.
> is the reason that I most likely will never get to
> permanently live in Japan again, because my wife knows she can succeed
> faster and more easily in America.
That is true. But your wife is also willing to get a valuable education and stick out a job search
more than one year, without giving up. She is even willing to be the breadwinner of your family.
Your wife is a very uncommon woman and I hope she is appreciated. If she were typical of women,
most kinds of discrimination would practically disappear in a few decades, because employers would
know they could be relied upon to support the company.
Eric Takabayashi
Then you should also read the stories indication the approval ratings of the US
president and his policies, such as a war on Iraq, domestic measures in the war
on terror, or the possibility of more wars elsewhere, or listen to interviews
with the general public, to get an idea of how they also think.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi wrote
>
> > God man, I know women who do not even
> > do housework (maybe their live in mother or mother in law does it,
> > yet they have no jobs and bitch about life, the economy, or their
> > husbands and their jobs.
>
> But we were specifically talking about those who do work but take care to
> keep their income below the tax threshold.
And I'm illustrating attitudes of some problem women who also do so.
> > Unless women earned their own money and made their own payments,
> > they would not get benefits. The same situation breadwinner men are in.
> But men
> > don't have a problem with working to support themselves despite paying
> taxes.
> > Women should learn it too.
>
> But what do you think would happen in reality?
Japan might become like other industrialized countries where women do more to
take care of themselves.
> Do you think all the women
> who are currently covered via their husband's insurance will suddenly rush
> out and get work?
They would if they wanted to be covered.
> Don't you think that many of them would simply become an
> unacceptably heavy burden on their husbands who, as I say, would resent this
> and bitterly oppose such a move?
You see the problem with women if YOU are the one proposing such an outcome?
Why don't such women just get it through their heads that if they want more
money, they need to work more or harder, or change jobs or train for better
jobs, if they want to earn like or be respected more like the dominant men?
Women in other countries did.
> > What poverty traps in Japan are you referring to?
>
> I wasn't referring specifically to Japan. You ask for parallels, and I can
> give you plenty, one being the way I've seen some people (mainly in the UK)
> actually *choose* the dole over a low-paid job because working simply wasn't
> worth the candle.
That is why workers should be paid more, and why people on the dole who make
such choices, should be cut off. Welfare and unemployment is for people who
can't work, not people who quit jobs to go on vacation like in Japan.
> Another parallel from the UK would be the fact that there
> there is a threshold above which inheritances are liable for death duties,
> and people respond by doing their damnedest to give away as much of their
> money as possible before dying in order to be below the threshold and avoid
> the duty.
What about it? My family might lose half its wealth to inheritance tax or
capital gains taxes if we try to sell. If I want more money, I'll just have to
work and save. Other people who have more time to work more, can learn it, too.
> > You'll notice Japanese level of homelessness is also
> > much lower than in the US, about one tenth the population.
>
> God, is it really as high as that in the US? That's appalling.
As I replied elsewhere, no, not 10 percent of the US population, Japanese
homeless number about one tenth the number of homeless in the US.
> > > > What market are you referring to which Chinese women dominate?
> > >
> > > Sorry, Eric. "The game" is a longstanding euphemism for prostitution.
> >
> > Then foreign women are hardly dominant in that area.
>
> Well, when I get off the train at night I have to run the gamut of up to a
> dozen Chinese prostitutes just to get from the railway station to the bus
> station. Your mileage may differ.
Japanese women work from establishments or do it through the communications
network. They don't need to walk the streets unless they are touts advertising
a shop. You will never actually see most Japanese women who provide sexual
services for money.
Did you not notice such a fact?
> > Women will even tell me proverbs such as, the best
> > husband is not at home, or tell me how happy they are that their
> > husbands are not around, or the hell they have to go through with
> > their sick or retired husbands. They'd be divorced if they weren't
> > more worried about not getting their husbands' money.
>
> Well, and others will tell me that they have to place their husband's
> slippers just so at the entrance when he comes home, have his newspaper in
> place, serve him tea or coffee at his whim and the closest he ever gets to
> communicating with her is grunting,
I know a lot of middle aged and elderly people. I don't get that, though I am
sure it is true of more old fashioned people.
But that is another issue. So ask the women why they didn't support themselves
or get a divorce if they are so unhappy, or why they did not better invest in
themselves to be better able to support themselves.
> partly because he is exhausted after
> another twelve-hour working day.
Why yes, and that is because the husband/man is expected to work in Japanese
society. If my wife expected me to work my ass off and support her, I'd
explicitly tell her to take care of the house and kids in return. That's not
sexism, because that view of what a man "should" do is a choice she made.
Taking care of the house *in return* for the man's financial support is fair
play. It is extremely unfair of the women to dump their husbands when they no
longer work (particularly when they may still receive a hefty pension package
until death). Those men didn't dump their wives just because they aren't so
slim, young, or pretty, or because they've ended their child rearing duties.
> Having sacrificed their lives to propping
> up their husbands as the backbone of the Japanese economy, surely they are
> entitled to health treatment and some kind of pension?
Women don't need to be full time housewives. They've learned that elsewhere.
They can also learn to support themselves like men do, so men can also have
more time to work at home, and relieve some of their own stress that they not
work themselves into ill health or suicide.
> > unlike elsewhere, Japanese women are not acting for
> > themselves. There have been figures fighting for women's rights
> > in the US since at least the mid 19th century, putting themselves at risk,
> > being harassed, mobbed, and jailed.
>
> Well, perhaps Japanese society (and in particular its women) wants different
> things, and forcing them to eat the same pie as the Sepponians simply isn't
> appropriate?
No, women in Japan certainly do want the kinds of rights women in other
countries enjoy, such as more equality in society or the workplace. Don't tell
me you haven't noticed.
They just aren't as willing as foreign women to work for it to achieve it for
themselves.
> > > Poor kids! Their childhood has been sacrificed on the altar of entrance
> > > examinations,
> >
> > That's a mistake to begin with. I would do away with those. Grades and
> other
> > than academic achievements, such as demonstrations of leadership and
> > extracurricular activity, are more important.
> >
> > > their future is in thrall to some corporate magnate,
> >
> > They should do away with that corporate structure, too. The economy is
> having
> > that effect. Economic instability is making millions of Japanese start to
> take
> > charge of themselves. Thank god.
>
> OK, so you have a package, one that would affect every aspect of Japanese
> society,
Of course. To simply cut off underachieving women or men would be unfair. They
need opportunities to train and work.
> not simply a one-off proposal to cut benefits for non-working women
> . All you need now is to get yourself elected, or bend the ear of those in
> power, and Bob's your uncle!
I don't need to do anything to change Japan. Open your eyes and notice how
Japan has already changed a lot, even just during the short ten years I have
been in Japan. Public school is off on Saturdays, as are many companies. People
don't need to study or work so hard now, and in fact, never did. The poor
economy has made Japanese more choosy about the jobs they wish to pursue, or
what company they would like to work for. Women suffer less discrimination, and
have much greater opportunities (hey, they can even be 747 pilots and
shinkansen drivers, or prefectural governors and heads of political parties or
ministries, which millions still unfortunately CHOOSE not to take. Women I know
who actually do pursue careers are the ones who seem most upset by persisting
traditional female behavior or views.
Efforts need to be made just to encourage or hasten such change.
mtfe...@netscape.net
> Kevin Gowen wrote:
>> No.
> Ah. No, sorry. The number of homeless in Japan are about one tenth the
> homeless in the US. I've seen more permanent homeless estimated about 300,000
> in the US.
Shoot, we might have that many here in the Bay Area.
I do remember the time I saw my first (obviously) homeless guy in Japan. In
the gardens of the Asakusa Prince, surrounding by 5 very polite, very firm
Japanese policemen.
Mike
Norman Diamond
> Norman Diamond wrote:
> > "Ernest Schaal" <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote in message
> > news:BB2C1834.4298%esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp...
> >
> > > Unfortunately, this mindset, which brings into mind the thinking of sexist
> > > third world countries, seems to be accurately reported. Clearly, the
> > > Japanese have a LONG way to go before the reach maturity.
> >
> > Try again. You've quoted Japanese GOVERNMENT officials. The Japanese
> > GOVERNMENT has a long way to go before reaching maturity.
>
No, Takabayashi, I did not. At least not in this discussion. I do not
think I have ever quoted an LDP official in this newsgroup. I've sometimes
talked ABOUT officials of various parties or of no party (e.g. bureaucrats)
but do not think I have ever quoted one. Your assertion is irrelevant to
the discussion here so I don't really intend to pursue it, but it is so
nonsensical that I couldn't just ignore it. In fact it is so nonsensical
that it makes me wonder if you're a government official in disguise?
Eric Takabayashi
> "Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:3F06CE99...@yahoo.co.jp...
> > Norman Diamond wrote:
> > > "Ernest Schaal" <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote in message
> > > news:BB2C1834.4298%esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp...
> > >
> > > > Unfortunately, this mindset, which brings into mind the thinking of sexist
> > > > third world countries, seems to be accurately reported. Clearly, the
> > > > Japanese have a LONG way to go before the reach maturity.
> > >
> > > Try again. You've quoted Japanese GOVERNMENT officials. The Japanese
> > > GOVERNMENT has a long way to go before reaching maturity.
> >
> > You've quoted LDP officials.
>
> No, Takabayashi, I did not.
Alright then, your statement refers to some officials of various parties who've
said and done interesting things this past week.
> At least not in this discussion. I do not
> think I have ever quoted an LDP official in this newsgroup. I've sometimes
> talked ABOUT officials of various parties or of no party (e.g. bureaucrats)
> but do not think I have ever quoted one. Your assertion is irrelevant to
> the discussion here so I don't really intend to pursue it, but it is so
> nonsensical that I couldn't just ignore it. In fact it is so nonsensical
> that it makes me wonder if you're a government official in disguise?
Nope.
Ernest Schaal
eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 1:00 PM:
> Ernest Schaal wrote:
>
>> This time I quoted Japanese government officials, but other news articles I
>> have read have shown that Japanese businessmen are just as bad, and that
>> Japanese schoolteachers really have a problem keeping their hands off their
>> students.
>>
>> As for your remark about the president, that is one man. The wave of
>> Japanese political scandals involve a multitude of men.
>
> Then you should also read the stories indication the approval ratings of the
> US president and his policies, such as a war on Iraq, domestic measures in the
> war on terror, or the possibility of more wars elsewhere, or listen to
> interviews with the general public, to get an idea of how they also think.
Eric,
The high approval rating for Bush is because he has been he has been an
effective president. It does not mean that the country supports each and
every position that he takes.
In Japan though, there are even news stories to show that the establishment,
both in the government and in education and industry have low regard for the
rights of women. In japan, chikan is the rule for men, not the exception.
Eric Takabayashi
> in article 3F079EC2...@yahoo.co.jp, Eric Takabayashi at
> eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 1:00 PM:
>
> > Ernest Schaal wrote:
> >
> >> This time I quoted Japanese government officials, but other news articles I
> >> have read have shown that Japanese businessmen are just as bad, and that
> >> Japanese schoolteachers really have a problem keeping their hands off their
> >> students.
> >>
> >> As for your remark about the president, that is one man. The wave of
> >> Japanese political scandals involve a multitude of men.
> >
> > Then you should also read the stories indication the approval ratings of the
> > US president and his policies, such as a war on Iraq, domestic measures in the
> > war on terror, or the possibility of more wars elsewhere, or listen to
> > interviews with the general public, to get an idea of how they also think.
>
> Eric,
>
> The high approval rating for Bush is because he has been he has been an
> effective president. It does not mean that the country supports each and
> every position that he takes.
It certainly is when the questions *specifically* ask people's approval for the war
on Iraq or lengthy occupation or reorganization, the possibility of future wars,
and the like. The large majority of Americans surveyed (with a small margin of
error) most certainly did support the war on Iraq.
Ernest Schaal
eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 4:55 PM:
> Ernest Schaal wrote:
>>
>> Eric,
>>
>> The high approval rating for Bush is because he has been he has been an
>> effective president. It does not mean that the country supports each and
>> every position that he takes.
>
> It certainly is when the questions *specifically* ask people's approval for
> the war on Iraq or lengthy occupation or reorganization, the possibility of
> future wars, and the like. The large majority of Americans surveyed (with a
> small margin of error) most certainly did support the war on Iraq.
Eric,
While I did not support the invasion of Iraq, I realize the difference
between bringing down a tyrant and advocating treating women like second
class citizens. Aren't you also able to make that distinction?
Eric Takabayashi
> While I did not support the invasion of Iraq, I realize the difference
> between bringing down a tyrant
So why doesn't the US bring down other tyrants who are better able to put up a
fight like Kim Jong-Il, or more importantly, don't have oil?
> and advocating treating women like second
> class citizens.
What does treatment women have to do with the way Americans explicitly approve
of Bush and his certain of his policies? I was not the one who brought up that
issue.
> Aren't you also able to make that distinction?
When talking about Bush and his policies, we are not talking about the situation
of women in Japan. But it could be indicative of how views of tens of millions
if not hundreds of millions of Americans may reflect the views or actions of the
President, as opposed to how representative Japanese individual politician's
attitudes and oddball statements represent public sentiment. I doubt a majority
of Japanese approve of gang rape or believe women without children to be
useless, but they most certainly do support traditional gender roles.
Ernest Schaal
eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 5:56 PM:
Eric,
I really think we are talking about apples and oranges here. On the one hand
there is be decision to invade Iraq, which had legitimate pros and cons and
on the other hand there is the Japanese politicians supporting gang rape and
sexism. To excuse the Japanese because of the invasion of Iraq is the
heights of ridiculousness.
Eric Takabayashi
> I really think we are talking about apples and oranges here. On the one hand
> there is be decision to invade Iraq, which had legitimate pros and cons and
> on the other hand there is the Japanese politicians supporting gang rape and
> sexism. To excuse the Japanese because of the invasion of Iraq is the
> heights of ridiculousness.
What leads you to believe I am excusing the Japanese just because I agree that what
politicians do or say may actually represent public sentiment?
John Yamamoto-Wilson
has
> > not been extended to refer to "unreconstructed" views in general?
(Sorry, I meant "political incorrectness", of course).
> No
Wow. And, conversely, the term "political correctness" is limited to the
use of euphemisms, and does not denote (as the Shorter Oxford has it)
"conformity to a body of liberal or radical opinion"?
Is this a tomahto/tomayto thing, or do you come from somewhere else
altogether?
Ernest Schaal
eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 6:11 PM:
If you are NOT excusing the Japanese, your meaning is clear as mud (dark
mud). When you go off on an anti-Bush tangent to a discussion of the
Japanese politicians supporting gang rape, I naturally assumed that you were
trying to excuse the Japanese politicians, because the only other possible
assumption is that you were deliberately trying to change the subject of the
thread out of a perverse disrespect of net etiquette.
Ernest Schaal
jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com wrote on 7/6/03 7:03 PM:
I think the one "guilty" of political correctness is you, who seems to be
advocating that condemning the Japanese politicians being in favor of gang
rape and sexism is somehow politically incorrect because it doesn't
recognize the liberal dogma of equal value for all belief systems. After
all, it is you, who is defending those politicians from "Western" criticism.
Eric Takabayashi
> in article 3F07E7AB...@yahoo.co.jp, Eric Takabayashi at
> eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 6:11 PM:
>
> > Ernest Schaal wrote:
> >
> >> I really think we are talking about apples and oranges here. On the one hand
> >> there is be decision to invade Iraq, which had legitimate pros and cons and
> >> on the other hand there is the Japanese politicians supporting gang rape and
> >> sexism. To excuse the Japanese because of the invasion of Iraq is the
> >> heights of ridiculousness.
> >
> > What leads you to believe I am excusing the Japanese just because I agree that
> > what politicians do or say may actually represent public sentiment?
>
> If you are NOT excusing the Japanese, your meaning is clear as mud (dark
> mud). When you go off on an anti-Bush tangent to a discussion of the
> Japanese politicians supporting gang rape, I naturally assumed that you were
> trying to excuse the Japanese politicians,
I'm not. Just pointing out that Bush's statements or actions may also sometimes
accurately reflect public opinion in his own country.
> because the only other possible
> assumption is that you were deliberately trying to change the subject of the
> thread out of a perverse disrespect of net etiquette.
Look back in the thread and see who it was brought up Bush and America, and who was
changing the subject from your depiction of Japanese as not yet mature. It was a
post in response to you, which you have not yet responded to, I must point out.
Ernest Schaal
eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 8:14 PM:
> Ernest Schaal wrote:
>
>> in article 3F07E7AB...@yahoo.co.jp, Eric Takabayashi at
>> eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 6:11 PM:
>>
>>> Ernest Schaal wrote:
>>>
>>>> I really think we are talking about apples and oranges here. On the one
>>>> hand there is be decision to invade Iraq, which had legitimate pros and
>>>> cons and on the other hand there is the Japanese politicians supporting
>>>> gang rape and sexism. To excuse the Japanese because of the invasion of
>>>> Iraq is the heights of ridiculousness.
>>>
>>> What leads you to believe I am excusing the Japanese just because I agree
>>> that what politicians do or say may actually represent public sentiment?
>>
>> If you are NOT excusing the Japanese, your meaning is clear as mud (dark
>> mud). When you go off on an anti-Bush tangent to a discussion of the
>> Japanese politicians supporting gang rape, I naturally assumed that you were
>> trying to excuse the Japanese politicians,
>
> I'm not. Just pointing out that Bush's statements or actions may also
> sometimes accurately reflect public opinion in his own country.
Okay, so Bush's statements may accurately reflect public opinion in his own
country. So what? What does that have to do with the topic of sexism,
specifically Japanese sexism? It would be nice if you could occasionally say
on topic.
>> because the only other possible
>> assumption is that you were deliberately trying to change the subject of the
>> thread out of a perverse disrespect of net etiquette.
>
> Look back in the thread and see who it was brought up Bush and America, and
> who was changing the subject from your depiction of Japanese as not yet
> mature. It was a post in response to you, which you have not yet responded
> to, I must point out.
I don't know which message you were talking about, since your message isn't
very specific, is it? Anyway, you might not be the one who started the
diversion, but you are the one who continued it.
Can I assume that you have ANY views on the topic on the subject denoted by
the title?
Eric Takabayashi
> in article 3F0804A2...@yahoo.co.jp, Eric Takabayashi at
> eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 8:14 PM:
>
> > Ernest Schaal wrote:
> >
> >> in article 3F07E7AB...@yahoo.co.jp, Eric Takabayashi at
> >> eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 6:11 PM:
> >>
> >>> Ernest Schaal wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I really think we are talking about apples and oranges here. On the one
> >>>> hand there is be decision to invade Iraq, which had legitimate pros and
> >>>> cons and on the other hand there is the Japanese politicians supporting
> >>>> gang rape and sexism. To excuse the Japanese because of the invasion of
> >>>> Iraq is the heights of ridiculousness.
> >>>
> >>> What leads you to believe I am excusing the Japanese just because I agree
> >>> that what politicians do or say may actually represent public sentiment?
> >>
> >> If you are NOT excusing the Japanese, your meaning is clear as mud (dark
> >> mud). When you go off on an anti-Bush tangent to a discussion of the
> >> Japanese politicians supporting gang rape, I naturally assumed that you were
> >> trying to excuse the Japanese politicians,
> >
> > I'm not. Just pointing out that Bush's statements or actions may also
> > sometimes accurately reflect public opinion in his own country.
>
> Okay, so Bush's statements may accurately reflect public opinion in his own
> country. So what? What does that have to do with the topic of sexism,
> specifically Japanese sexism? It would be nice if you could occasionally say
> on topic.
Go back and learn for yourself who brought up Bush and Americans, to see who I was
responding to before you jumped back in.
> >> because the only other possible
> >> assumption is that you were deliberately trying to change the subject of the
> >> thread out of a perverse disrespect of net etiquette.
> >
> > Look back in the thread and see who it was brought up Bush and America, and
> > who was changing the subject from your depiction of Japanese as not yet
> > mature. It was a post in response to you, which you have not yet responded
> > to, I must point out.
>
> I don't know which message you were talking about, since your message isn't
> very specific, is it?
Why don't you look and see the post I was responding to?
I thought lawyers were alleged to be in the top 1% of IQ.
> Anyway, you might not be the one who started the
> diversion, but you are the one who continued it.
>
> Can I assume that you have ANY views on the topic on the subject denoted by
> the title?
Why don't you go back in the post and read what I had to say about the
politicians' statements before I began responding to other posts trying to deflect
attention from Japanese politicians and Japanese views?
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> I think the one "guilty" of political correctness is you, who seems to be
> advocating that condemning the Japanese politicians being in favor of gang
> rape and sexism is somehow politically incorrect because it doesn't
> recognize the liberal dogma of equal value for all belief systems. After
> all, it is you, who is defending those politicians from "Western"
criticism.
Quarrelsome blighter, aren't you? Perhaps if you consulted a dictionary
before presuming to expound on the meaning of words, and took a course in
reading comprehension before presuming to tell people what they are or are
not defending you might actually be worth arguing with.
Funny, I didn't think I had much of a quibble with you until you started
pointing out the motes in my eye.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> In japan, chikan is the rule for men, not the exception.
This is a different Japan from the one I live in, surrounded as I am by very
decent (male and female) neighbours and with very decent (male and female)
colleagues at work and only once (in ten years) observing any form of
impropriety. On that occasion the young woman involved said, as she got off
the train, "Hey, you! Yes, you with the [detailed physical description]!
Sukebe!" All eyes were on him, laughing and mocking, and he practically
crawled out of the train at the next stop.
Perhaps I live a sheltered life, but pray tell me about this Japan in which
"chikan is the rule". In my teens I hung around some pretty dicey quarters
of Spanish cities and gained some interesting - but one-sided - views of
life in Spain as a result. Perhaps you can give me the low-down on an
equally murky and - albeit one-sided - spicey version of life in Japan, to
brighten up my well-ordered, but admittedly sometimes comparatively dull,
existence.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> While this story is unfortunate, the upside is that your nieces/nephews
have
> gained a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and capable mother.
Forgive me if there's some lurking irony here that's floating over my head,
but I see some glimmerings of a return to innocence here and want to be the
first to say that it's nice to see Kevin write something simple,
straightforward and *positive*. ;-)
Rodney Webster
Ernest Schaal <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
> Actually, I heard it from a variety of sources, including my wife, a friend,
> and an opinion article in the Japan Times.
And they all said that women "would never give birth in Japan because
the Japanese male-dominate (sic) medical profession dismisses their pain
as unimportant"? Your addition of "in Japan" here is interesting, as
well as the fact that you did not specify Japanese women (although the
latter could perhaps be assumed).
> As to your point about the third world countries, social customs have an
> overpowering force there. In Japan, social customs are weakening, and
> Japanese women have woke up to the fact that they have choices, including
> the choice not to have children if that means having them without pain
> medication. It is similar to the Indian women who are waking up to their
> choices and are fight back against brutal Indian customs, like burning wives
> who don't bring enough dowry.
Ah, so Japanese women *do* want to have children, it's just that one day
they suddenly woke up and thought, "hang that, I might want a child, but
not that much," and started to refuse impregnation?
The lack of pain-control here is the constant, so it must be some other
factor that has changed, and in fact you point it out yourself: The low
birth-rate in Japan is due to the fact that social customs are
weakening. Japanese women just don't want to have children that much,
and refuse to sacrifice their own personal interests, and now Japanese
society lets them make this choice.
Let's completely ignore the large financial burden that comes with
raising a child in Japan, that certainly has nothing to do with it.
BTW, I like the way you compare this issue to immolation of Indian
brides. It really helps to make Japanese men - not just doctors,
because after all, they are all part of this conspiracy, eh - seem more
evil and diabolical.
So from this comparison of yours I suppose you think the large number of
women who decide to give birth without the use of pain-killers are
suicidal masochists who have made a choice on par with setting
themselves on fire?
--
Rodney Webster
http://knot.mine.nu/
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> I thought lawyers were alleged to be in the top 1% of IQ.
Oh, God, he's another lawyer, is he? What is it that attracts lawyers to
this group? I, for one, could do without constant reminders of why Bleak
House is such a compelling read.
Eric Takabayashi
> Ernest Schaal wrote:
>
> > In japan, chikan is the rule for men, not the exception.
>
> This is a different Japan from the one I live in,
The Japan you "live in" is apparently not Japan as it is.
> surrounded as I am by very
> decent (male and female) neighbours and with very decent (male and female)
> colleagues at work
No doubt about that.
> and only once (in ten years) observing any form of
> impropriety.
Then perhaps you do not observe much.
> On that occasion the young woman involved said, as she got off
> the train, "Hey, you! Yes, you with the [detailed physical description]!
> Sukebe!" All eyes were on him, laughing and mocking, and he practically
> crawled out of the train at the next stop.
> Perhaps I live a sheltered life,
You're damned right you do, and you obviously are not doing much reading or
watching much news, or perhaps you have not spoken to enough women, if you do
not know about chikan. Even a small place like Fukuyama has over a hundred
complaints - this I heard direct from the police when I escorted a woman who
was assaulted herself. Tell me, have you even noticed any posters in the
stations maybe?
> but pray tell me about this Japan in which
> "chikan is the rule". In my teens I hung around some pretty dicey quarters
> of Spanish cities and gained some interesting - but one-sided - views of
> life in Spain as a result.
And you are now getting one sided views about Japan because you are living such
a sheltered life, apparently blind to what the media reports or what even
police would tell you themselves.
Rodney Webster
"Kevin Gowen" <kgowen...@myfastmail.com> wrote:
> Rodney Webster wrote:
> >
> > ...In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't have
> > higher birth-rates in third world countries,
>
> Then allow me to not surprise you. I've seen hard numbers on the topic but
> this should do for now:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/1194030.stm
> The annual world population growth rate is 1.3% - about 77m people a year.
> Six countries - India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh and Indonesia -
> account for half that total.
>
> ...
>
> By contrast the number of people living in the 48 least developed countries
> in the world is expected to triple by the year 2050.
Damnit, if only those poor people would stop breeding like rabbits we
wouldn't have so many poor people in the first place!
Rodney Webster
"Kevin Gowen" <kgowen...@myfastmail.com> wrote:
> While this story is unfortunate, the upside is that your nieces/nephews have
> gained a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and capable mother.
Personally, I would say that we can only assume that she is
"intelligent", and the two other qualities do not necessarily follow.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> Japan might become like other industrialized countries where women do more
to
> take care of themselves.
Well, it might. And everywhere might become so much like everywhere else
that we can't tell the difference. Then we could stop buying aeroplane
tickets, couldn't we? But that might be bad for Mammon...oops, sorry...the
economy, I mean!
But aren't you giving examples of just how well Japanese women are taking
care of themselves already, exploiting the system to the utmost? Frankly,
your angle seems to have more to do with a kind of jealousy that Japanese
women are already getting such a good deal for themselves (I'm sure you know
that in many families the husband hands over his wage packet to his wife and
gets pocket money in return) than with wanting to see them get a better
deal.
> > Don't you think that many of them would simply become an
> > unacceptably heavy burden on their husbands who, as I say, would resent
this
> > and bitterly oppose such a move?
>
> You see the problem with women if YOU are the one proposing such an
outcome?
> Why don't such women just get it through their heads that if they want
more
> money, they need to work more or harder, or change jobs or train for
better
> jobs, if they want to earn like or be respected more like the dominant
men?
> Women in other countries did.
This just feeds my suspicion that what's behind this is resentment that
Japanese women have found another way to get a good deal for themselves.
> Welfare and unemployment is for people who
> can't work, not people who quit jobs to go on vacation like in Japan.
Eric, the world over people will quit working at MacDonalds or the
equivalent when it suits them. They won't be walking out of career jobs -
male or female - in Japan or anywhere else for anything other than very good
reasons.
> My family might lose half its wealth to inheritance tax or
> capital gains taxes if we try to sell. If I want more money, I'll just
have to
> work and save. Other people who have more time to work more, can learn it,
too.
So you're playing by the book? Others don't, and that applies worldwide, not
just to Japanese women.
> Japanese women work from establishments or do it through the
communications
> network. They don't need to walk the streets unless they are touts
advertising
> a shop. You will never actually see most Japanese women who provide sexual
> services for money.
>
> Did you not notice such a fact?
How could I notice it if (as you tell me) I never see it?
> > Well, and others will tell me that they have to place their husband's
> > slippers just so at the entrance when he comes home, have his newspaper
in
> > place, serve him tea or coffee at his whim and the closest he ever gets
to
> > communicating with her is grunting,
>
> I know a lot of middle aged and elderly people. I don't get that, though I
am
> sure it is true of more old fashioned people.
>
> But that is another issue. So ask the women why they didn't support
themselves
> or get a divorce if they are so unhappy, or why they did not better invest
in
> themselves to be better able to support themselves.
Because they are playing the conventional game, "behind every slogging
salaryman there's a woman propping him up". This is the model on which Japan
achieved world-class status, and you are arguing for them to change it
now?!!
Oddly enough, Eric, I suspect you are right, but try telling *them* that -
*or* the country's policy-makers! The decision-making machinery here is
based on the idea that if it worked once it will work forever and any
policy, once adopted, is set to run on zircon rails forever.
> > Well, perhaps Japanese society (and in particular its women) wants
different
> > things, and forcing them to eat the same pie as the Sepponians simply
isn't
> > appropriate?
>
> No, women in Japan certainly do want the kinds of rights women in other
> countries enjoy, such as more equality in society or the workplace. Don't
tell
> me you haven't noticed.
OK, you're right again, but only in part. While women in Sepponia were
claiming the pill as a woman's right Japanese women were opposing it because
it involved health risks to their bodies and no risk or responsibility to
the male partner. (And, the more I think about it, the more I think they had
a point.) This revolution in attitudes will come about - is, indeed, long
overdue - but it will be a peculiarly Japanese phenomenon, just as the
revolution in attitudes that has taken place in social attitudes in the
south of Spain in the last few years is a peculiarly Andalusian phenomenon.
At least, I hope it will. I'd hate to think it was just going to happen as a
result of some form of cultural imperialism.
> They just aren't as willing as foreign women to work for it to achieve it
for
> themselves.
You don't know the half of it.
> > . All you need now is to get yourself elected, or bend the ear of those
in
> > power, and Bob's your uncle!
>
> I don't need to do anything to change Japan. Open your eyes and notice how
> Japan has already changed a lot, even just during the short ten years I
have
> been in Japan.
I've been here for ten years, too, and have indeed noticed many changes. It
hasn't reached flashpoint yet, but the day is coming (is indeed alreay here
in some quarters) when women will be valued for something other than their
ability to bear babies and serve coffee to their male peers at work.
> Efforts need to be made just to encourage or hasten such change.
Oh, I do my bit, believe me!
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> > > In japan, chikan is the rule for men, not the exception.
> >
> > This is a different Japan from the one I live in,
>
> The Japan you "live in" is apparently not Japan as it is.
[snip]
> > Perhaps I live a sheltered life,
>
> You're damned right you do, and you obviously are not doing much reading
or
> watching much news, or perhaps you have not spoken to enough women, if you
do
> not know about chikan. Even a small place like Fukuyama has over a hundred
> complaints - this I heard direct from the police when I escorted a woman
who
> was assaulted herself. Tell me, have you even noticed any posters in the
> stations maybe?
Eric, I'm streetwise, I keep my eyes open, and I listen to stories from my
students, my friends, my colleagues, my neighbours and my wife. Yes, I
follow the news, yes, I've noticed the posters on the station.
That doesn't change the fact that, day after day, I watch women - attractive
ones, too (why not admit it!) - get on and off trains without being
manhandled by men. And one hundred complaints in Fukuyama (population
378,793 in the year 2000 [http://www.demographia.com/db-japancity.htm] does
not make chikan "the rule". Sorry.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric, I'm streetwise, I keep my eyes open, and I listen to stories from my
> students, my friends, my colleagues, my neighbours and my wife. Yes, I
> follow the news, yes, I've noticed the posters on the station.
So why don't you notice what other people do about Japan, or has too much
Japaneseness rubbed off on you leading you to grow accustomed to it, try to
draw attention away from the issue, or deny reality like many locals do?
> That doesn't change the fact that, day after day, I watch women - attractive
> ones, too (why not admit it!) - get on and off trains without being
> manhandled by men.
How do you know they are not being manhandled, when it would be usual for
chikan to try not to be seen, and that they are not the women who remain silent
about it?
So street wise man, did you ever read any surveys on victimization by chikan?
In one I read in a front page national news story (Yomiuri, perhaps) while
still on the JET Program, over three quarters of female respondents down to
junior high age concentrated in the Tokyo area reported being victimized by
chikan.
> And one hundred complaints in Fukuyama (population
> 378,793 in the year 2000 [http://www.demographia.com/db-japancity.htm] does
> not make chikan "the rule". Sorry.
Even if those were reported in just a few months?
John W.
> >>
> >> Then you aren't paying much attention to the attitudes of the
> >> general public
> >> themselves when they respond in surveys for example, that they
> >> support
> >> traditional gender roles
> >
> > Once I wrote a graduate thesis on a topic similar to this. Sigh.
>
> Should we take that sigh to mean that there is something dismaying about
> traditional gender roles?
No, though to an extent I would agree with that. The sigh is from
remembering that I once did some substantial work, knew my way around
SAS and SPSS, and looked forward to a promising career. Now I'm
getting rejected by Starbucks because I'm overqualified.
John W.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> How do you know they are not being manhandled, when it would be usual for
> chikan to try not to be seen
Put it this way; I've seen more pickpockets (who are trying even harder not
to be seen) than chikan. It is almost impossible for a person who is being
touched up not to react in some way or other, and I've seen it often enough
but, strange as it may seem, not in trains in Japan. I've seen several
situations where women were having a heavy trip laid on them by a man who
was either accompanying them or who had latched on before they came into my
orbit, and have to say that that is one of the few situations in which, in
my experience, bystanders have seen fit to intervene.
> So street wise man, did you ever read any surveys on victimization by
chikan?
Do you have to be street wise to read surveys?
> In one I read in a front page national news story (Yomiuri, perhaps) while
> still on the JET Program, over three quarters of female respondents down
to
> junior high age concentrated in the Tokyo area reported being victimized
by
> chikan.
Surveys also show that over half of US women report sexual harassment in the
workplace, so shall we just amend Ernest Schaal's
> In japan, chikan is the rule for men, not the exception
to
> In japan, as (to only a slightly lesser degree) in the United States,
chikan is the rule for men, not the exception
and move on?
John W.
> "John W." wrote:
>
>
> > After a year or so it was
> > obvious that this situation wasn't going to change,
>
> Why did it take one year to find that out?
>
Because when you're young and full of dreams it's very easy to be
misled. We've all been there at one time or other.
> > so she decided to settle down and be a mom.
>
> Why did she not look for another job after just one year? My wife is a victim of discrimination,
> and she's now 35 with two kids, but she continues to study for national exams for a full time
> office job or home work, while getting money at a crap job. I know women who are not so fresh out
> of school, yet have not given up on work or further study. I applaud them. I did not give up on a
> job search after about 14 months unemployed, either, and neither did you. The vast majority of men
> have no choice about working at all, no matter how crappy the job, salary, or the economy.
>
> This is one of the important differences between men and women as seen in Japan.
>
> > I tell this story because I feel it's a damn
> > shame that Japan lost a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and
> > capable member of the work force
>
> But unfortunately not willing to stick a situation out or look for a job longer than a year.
I didn't say that. She worked there for several years. But after the
first year or so she figured out her coworkers in the same job were
moving forward whereas she wasn't.
> If
> the market were so stacked against me, as it indeed is now after ten years in Japan, I would go
> back to school for a new education, and look for a new job, even if it means starting a totally
> brand new career such as nursing as a man at 40 with a wife and two children to support. I see
> what laid off men, or men who quit unsatisfying jobs in mid career do.
One thing I love to hear is what employed people will do when they are
unemployed. Let me educate you. For starters, you continue to think
that you will soon be employed. After six months or so, it becomes
obvious that things are not going according to Hoyle, so you look for
education. But, of course, there are admission deadlines,
restrictions, etc., so it's not all that easy to just go back to
school. There is, of course, technical education; but the cost is
prohibitive (and student loans, too, have certain deadlines and
restrictions), and you still have to find some work while you study so
that you can pay the bills. But since you haven't been able to get
work for nearly a year by this point, you can't find that part time
job (after all, they didn't hire you when you weren't a student,
either) because you're overqualified (and you have a fairly impressive
resume). Try to lie on it, and you will get caught and in all
likelihood fired. So it isn't that easy to just regear; most people I
know who have done it had spouses with a good salary, or had access to
some good career resources (that many companies supply when they fire
you).
> > Note that this male mindset
>
> Note the FEMALE mindset when giving up on work after one year, or ONLY
> getting a junior college
> education, not sticking out crap jobs or job searches or pursuing
> competitive university education
> like the men, and not working the same hours, sometimes to the detriment of > their health.
What women do you know? Most women I know in professional careers went
to Junior College because, at the time (mid 80s/early 90s) that was
what they were strongly advised to do. And many Junior Colleges are
better respected than four-year institutions. That aside, they still
work the same hours men do (or are told to go home because they aren't
given the same amount of work to do in the first place), stick to crap
jobs (my s-i-l did) and eventually grow so disillusioned that they
become 'freeters' or some other type of social parasite, and do suffer
many of the same health problems men do (except, perhaps, the
smoking/drinking related illnesses, which as we all know have precious
little to do with actual work).
> Major
> reasons for the obvious differences in "men's" work and "women's" work in
> Japan. It is wrong to
> discriminate against an applicant just because she is a woman before giving
> her a chance, but men
> and women are quite different in Japan.
>
I know. And that's the problem. Moreover, that mindset is the problem.
From the start women are often not given the same chances men are,
and, though it's changing, are generally given less attention than the
men (how many girl's high school sports, for example, get national
attention twice a year, including major network TV coverage).
> > is the reason that I most likely will never get to
> > permanently live in Japan again, because my wife knows she can succeed
> > faster and more easily in America.
>
> That is true. But your wife is also willing to get a valuable education
In AMERICA. Most of the female PhDs I know from Japan that work in the
US really don't want to return. One is a surgeon, and is facing losing
her career because she chose to have a baby.
> and
> stick out a job search
> more than one year, without giving up.
Actually she went to one of the nation's best universities, so she
didn't really have to 'search' for a job too hard.
> She is even willing to be the breadwinner of your family.
Unfortunately she has no choice on this one. If you asked her, she
would gladly give up this responsibility.
> Your wife is a very uncommon woman and I hope she is appreciated. If she were typical of women,
> most kinds of discrimination would practically disappear in a few decades, because employers would
> know they could be relied upon to support the company.
She is without doubt most untypical. What I admire about her is that,
in general, she doesn't care a whit if someone feels negatively
towards her because she's female/asian/whatever. What she dislikes
greatly is anyone that stands in the way of her research.
John W.
John W.
> John W. wrote:
> > Well, in the case of my sister-in-law she fits into the wanted to work
> > until she had kids category, mainly because from the get go she pretty
> > much figured there wasn't much chance of a career (and she is just as
> > strong willed and determined as my wife, and she would have *liked* a
> > career). This view was solidified after she graduated near the top of
> > her class from a good junior college in Osaka (don't know which one).
> > Her first job was with a nice prestigious bank's Himeji branch. While
> > there was some equality in terms of job, at least at the beginning;
> > there were men categorized exactly the same as her. Yet she HAD to go
> > to work 15 minutes early every morning to get coffee/tea ready, and
> > HAD to make coffee/tea for every meeting of her group, along with the
> > other token ladies on the "career" track. After a year or so it was
> > obvious that this situation wasn't going to change, so she decided to
> > settle down and be a mom. I tell this story because I feel it's a damn
> > shame that Japan lost a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and
> > employees were incapable of making their own damn tea. Note that this
> > male mindset is the reason that I most likely will never get to
> > permanently live in Japan again, because my wife knows she can succeed
> > faster and more easily in America.
>
That's actually how she seems to see things, in part because her
mother, too, was very dedicated to her family and worked (still works)
meaningless jobs in order to pay the bills. I also get the impression
that a role model she's setting up for our niece is my wife.
John W.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>
> > Japan might become like other industrialized countries where women do more
> to
> > take care of themselves.
>
> Well, it might. And everywhere might become so much like everywhere else
> that we can't tell the difference.
I did not claim that and you know that is not what was meant.
> Then we could stop buying aeroplane
> tickets, couldn't we? But that might be bad for Mammon...oops, sorry...the
> economy, I mean!
>
> But aren't you giving examples of just how well Japanese women are taking
> care of themselves already, exploiting the system to the utmost? Frankly,
> your angle seems to have more to do with a kind of jealousy that Japanese
> women are already getting such a good deal for themselves (I'm sure you know
> that in many families the husband hands over his wage packet to his wife and
> gets pocket money in return) than with wanting to see them get a better
> deal.
I do want women to get a better ideal. With responsibility and power will come
FREEDOM and even greater choice than they have now.
Is your angle keeping women down and dependent on men, unable to even free
themselves from an unhappy marriage because they had not prepared themselves to
take better care of themselves? Do you simply accept women as victims? Why
don't you want them AND their society to change for the better?
> > > Don't you think that many of them would simply become an
> > > unacceptably heavy burden on their husbands who, as I say, would resent
> this
> > > and bitterly oppose such a move?
> >
> > You see the problem with women if YOU are the one proposing such an
> outcome?
> > Why don't such women just get it through their heads that if they want
> more
> > money, they need to work more or harder, or change jobs or train for
> better
> > jobs, if they want to earn like or be respected more like the dominant
> men?
> > Women in other countries did.
>
> This just feeds my suspicion that what's behind this is resentment that
> Japanese women have found another way to get a good deal for themselves.
Your attitude feeds my suspicion you want women held down. Are you sure you are
not excusing the Japanese politicians for their public statements?
I am not "jealous" of women. I prefer being free to do what I choose through my
own income, and NOT be tied to the home or babysitting all day. My wife is one
of those women who enjoy work, and explicitly feels bored at home with the
kids. Work for my wife and child care for my kids is best for all involved.
There are many women who do not like being tied to the home or children. Quite
frankly, it seems recently I don't know a single middle aged or elderly married
woman who actually likes being married, because I hear so often they'd LIKE to
be divorced or living abroad alone, freed from their husbands or even their
kids. So why don't they do something about it like women in other countries
did, and like women even in Japan do, even in this poor economy?
> > Welfare and unemployment is for people who
> > can't work, not people who quit jobs to go on vacation like in Japan.
>
> Eric, the world over people will quit working at MacDonalds or the
> equivalent when it suits them. They won't be walking out of career jobs -
> male or female - in Japan or anywhere else for anything other than very good
> reasons.
Bullshit. Is this more of your ignorance of the real Japan? Government findings
showed 70% of unemployed people QUIT their jobs. With the obvious exception of
the Sogo bankruptcy, I don't personally know any laid off people myself. The
many people I know out of work (near 100% female) CHOSE to quit. People
explicitly tell me that they quit their jobs simply because they didn't like
it, that they were not interesting, or they want a long vacation (long could
mean longer than one week, or literal years). Women (plural - NOT men) will
explicitly tell me to my face that they quit jobs to collect unemployment and
take a rest. You can hear such stories in the media as well. These are NOT the
many people I know complaining of such harsh conditions at work. Those people
stick it out, even if I suggest that doing so is not good for them, or that
they might prefer another job.
> > My family might lose half its wealth to inheritance tax or
> > capital gains taxes if we try to sell. If I want more money, I'll just
> have to
> > work and save. Other people who have more time to work more, can learn it,
> too.
>
> So you're playing by the book? Others don't,
There is nothing wrong with giving away wealth to avoid estate tax, as you were
not accusing people of falsifying reports or tax evasion. God bless them for
their generosity.
> and that applies worldwide, not
> just to Japanese women.
You mean worldwide that people who want money or more money, do not work for it
at outside jobs? They just live off their husbands or parents like Japanese
women? That would come to a surprise for the majority of western women.
> > Japanese women work from establishments or do it through the
> communications
> > network. They don't need to walk the streets unless they are touts
> advertising
> > a shop. You will never actually see most Japanese women who provide sexual
> > services for money.
> >
> > Did you not notice such a fact?
>
> How could I notice it if (as you tell me) I never see it?
You could know even the basics of mizu shobai if you were as street wise as you
claimed. Chinese street walkers (personally I've heard of Latinos) are hardly
representative of the Japanese sex trade. Do you not even get the sex industry
fliers in your mailbox or see ads in the papers or posters on the streets? Does
the open call for college girls, housewives, OLs, etc. make you think they are
asking for Chinese women and that the majority of women in the sex trade are
Chinese? Or do you hang around certain areas of Kabukicho?
> > > Well, and others will tell me that they have to place their husband's
> > > slippers just so at the entrance when he comes home, have his newspaper
> in
> > > place, serve him tea or coffee at his whim and the closest he ever gets
> to
> > > communicating with her is grunting,
> >
> > I know a lot of middle aged and elderly people. I don't get that, though I
> am
> > sure it is true of more old fashioned people.
> >
> > But that is another issue. So ask the women why they didn't support
> themselves
> > or get a divorce if they are so unhappy, or why they did not better invest
> in
> > themselves to be better able to support themselves.
>
> Because they are playing the conventional game, "behind every slogging
> salaryman there's a woman propping him up".
Then guess what? They will likely get the conventional housewife's or Japanese
woman's life, and they shouldn't act so ignorant when they find their pre
marriage or pre job search dreams don't hold up.
> This is the model on which Japan
> achieved world-class status,
Japan's questionable financial practices and outdated, inefficient business
practices were major reasons Japan achieved world class status.
> and you are arguing for them to change it
> now?!!
Yes. Because the system is being exposed for the mistake it always was. The
people I know, and the politicians on tv know it must change. They just don't
want to take the heat for changing it themselves (eg Koizumi regarding raising
taxes to pay for the elderly) or take responsibility for the results of their
own actions. If a woman living off her husband isn't living well enough, the
husband (or company or economy) is blamed, but if a woman trying taking care of
herself, it will mostly be up to her. Most women are scared of that. Men aren't
given a choice.
> Oddly enough, Eric, I suspect you are right,
Then why not simply say so, and not spend so much time standing up for such old
fashioned or inefficient ways and defending those who make such inflammatory
statements about women.
> but try telling *them* that -
I do tell them. Mostly I get the same excuses that you give. I noted to my wife
just last week after seeing a Super Terebi on successful female company
presidents that successful women I have met or hear about don't bitch about
barriers to women. My wife doesn't bitch about sexual discrimination, either.
She's too busy working and studying for a better job.
> *or* the country's policy-makers!
Oh, you mean like the men who made some interesting public statements, whom you
are defending?
> The decision-making machinery here is
> based on the idea that if it worked once it will work forever and any
> policy, once adopted, is set to run on zircon rails forever.
If you believe that is not the case, why don't you try pointing that out?
> > > Well, perhaps Japanese society (and in particular its women) wants
> different
> > > things, and forcing them to eat the same pie as the Sepponians simply
> isn't
> > > appropriate?
> >
> > No, women in Japan certainly do want the kinds of rights women in other
> > countries enjoy, such as more equality in society or the workplace. Don't
> tell
> > me you haven't noticed.
>
> OK, you're right again, but only in part. While women in Sepponia were
> claiming the pill as a woman's right Japanese women were opposing it because
> it involved health risks to their bodies
They were brainwashed by the Ministry of Health which prefers more childbirths
and lucrative abortions, they remember the old high dosage pills and their side
effects, and the fact that the newer low dosage pill is not covered by
insurance, which makes it seem an impractical choice. Don't tell me you haven't
noticed those issues either.
> and no risk or responsibility to the male partner.
There is risk or responsibility to the male. Perhaps the women do not want to
take responsibility for themselves and their own choices to have sex with men
they do not believe will stick around if a child is born or who do not respect
their wishes to put on a condom. If I believed a woman was not worth marrying
and risking disease and financial responsibility for, for the rest of my life,
I stayed away.
> (And, the more I think about it, the more I think they had
> a point.) This revolution in attitudes will come about - is, indeed, long
> overdue - but it will be a peculiarly Japanese phenomenon, just as the
> revolution in attitudes that has taken place in social attitudes in the
> south of Spain in the last few years is a peculiarly Andalusian phenomenon.
> At least, I hope it will. I'd hate to think it was just going to happen as a
> result of some form of cultural imperialism.
You mean like how some of Japan's more significant rights like women's suffrage
came about as a result of losing a war they started?
> > They just aren't as willing as foreign women to work for it to achieve it
> for
> > themselves.
>
> You don't know the half of it.
Are you agreeing with me, or claiming I don't know that Japanese women are
willing to fight for the rights they want to have?
> > > . All you need now is to get yourself elected, or bend the ear of those
> in
> > > power, and Bob's your uncle!
> >
> > I don't need to do anything to change Japan. Open your eyes and notice how
> > Japan has already changed a lot, even just during the short ten years I
> have
> > been in Japan.
>
> I've been here for ten years, too, and have indeed noticed many changes. It
> hasn't reached flashpoint yet,
It took well over a century in the US. It really took off about three decades
ago, and still continues today. I expect it will take Japanese women till my
daughter grows up to get their act together. I am not worried about my
daughter, but if she turns her back on the opportunities available to women
even today, and makes the choice to be a freeter or housewife (of course I
would allow it) she'd better be prepared to live with that decision. Beyond
graduation, "parasite" is one option not open to my children.
> but the day is coming (is indeed alreay here in some quarters) when women
> will be valued for something other than their ability to bear babies and
> serve coffee to their male peers at work.
If women in Japan also SHOWED themselves to be valuable, as women have
elsewhere, or were as willing to look out for themselves, they might get the
same level of respect as men or women elsewhere. But no, even the women who do
not claim to be victims of discrimination too often make the deliberate choice
to NOT attend four year university or look for a serious job (IF they even HAVE
an idea of the job they want and how to communicate that in interview), or
indeed, may explicitly not want ANY job at all, expecting family or future
husband to look after them; thus holding themselves down. If women quit their
jobs on me because they simply didn't like it, or because they were going to
get married or have a child, perhaps had it planned from the very start to only
work till age 25 or 28, (note men are MUCH less likely to do so) I'd be wary of
hiring women, too. In the US it would be discriminatory to ask people about
marriage plans. In Japan it could be necessary to make employment choices. Too
bad so many people lie or do not respect the terms of the employment contract.
> > Efforts need to be made just to encourage or hasten such change.
>
> Oh, I do my bit, believe me!
Then pardon my saying so, but excusing politicians who make idiot statements,
criticizing foreigners who would criticize those idiot statements, making
excuses for why people would CHOOSE not to achieve, or accusing me of being
jealous or cold because I would have people with choices be more responsible,
for THEIR own good; is not the way.
Ryan Ginstrom
"John Yamamoto-Wilson" <jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
> This just feeds my suspicion that what's behind this is resentment that
> Japanese women have found another way to get a good deal for themselves.
It is a pretty low rung on the ladder to Enlightenment (which, BTW,
culminates with a multi-oku yen contract to grunt in genki-drink
commercials) if you set yourself upon some kind of self-proclaimed moral
high ground, then bitch and whine when everybody doesn't follow your
sterling lead.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Eric Takabayashi
> > > After a year or so it was
> > > obvious that this situation wasn't going to change,
> >
> > Why did it take one year to find that out?
> >
> Because when you're young and full of dreams it's very easy to be
> misled. We've all been there at one time or other.
Since I was a student I paid attention to such basic pre employment advice as researching an employer
or workplace before making the decision. If I were a woman and went to interview in a company where
women wore uniforms and men didn't, or saw women making copies and serving men, I wouldn't bother
applying.
> > > so she decided to settle down and be a mom.
> >
> > Why did she not look for another job after just one year? My wife is a victim of discrimination,
> > and she's now 35 with two kids, but she continues to study for national exams for a full time
> > office job or home work, while getting money at a crap job. I know women who are not so fresh out
> > of school, yet have not given up on work or further study. I applaud them. I did not give up on a
> > job search after about 14 months unemployed, either, and neither did you. The vast majority of men
> > have no choice about working at all, no matter how crappy the job, salary, or the economy.
> >
> > This is one of the important differences between men and women as seen in Japan.
> >
> > > I tell this story because I feel it's a damn
> > > shame that Japan lost a very, very, very intelligent, dedicated, and
> > > capable member of the work force
> >
> > But unfortunately not willing to stick a situation out or look for a job longer than a year.
>
> I didn't say that. She worked there for several years.
Oh, like me on the JET Program or in my current job. I stuck it out. And the situation gets better all
the time, because I didn't give up. I am quite happy at my job, but not because it is so great.
> But after the
> first year or so she figured out her coworkers in the same job were
> moving forward whereas she wasn't.
Do you mean only the men? The first successful sexual harassment lawsuit in Japan concerned a case
precisely like that. Did she consider suing?
What was her plan by the way? Was she going to be a career woman, or was she going to be one of the
women who quit at marrying age?
> > If
> > the market were so stacked against me, as it indeed is now after ten years in Japan, I would go
> > back to school for a new education, and look for a new job, even if it means starting a totally
> > brand new career such as nursing as a man at 40 with a wife and two children to support. I see
> > what laid off men, or men who quit unsatisfying jobs in mid career do.
>
> One thing I love to hear is what employed people will do when they are
> unemployed. Let me educate you.
I was unemployed for 14 months during a recession, so I know how it was and exactly how I felt, so bad
I wanted to kill myself; and I'd start my own business or go back to school to be a rookie middle aged
male nurse now, because I'm wiser and also wisely saved some money. I followed the old Business Week
advice and saved up six months' salary. Then it became a few years' worth of salary. And damn if my
wife didn't have even more money saved than I did before we got married.
> For starters, you continue to think
> that you will soon be employed. After six months or so, it becomes
> obvious that things are not going according to Hoyle, so you look for
> education. But, of course, there are admission deadlines,
> restrictions, etc., so it's not all that easy to just go back to
> school. There is, of course, technical education; but the cost is
> prohibitive (and student loans, too, have certain deadlines and
> restrictions), and you still have to find some work while you study so
> that you can pay the bills.
Luckily, my own home town school is 550 dollars a semester. It's a quality program, but I don't care
about name, anyway.
> But since you haven't been able to get
> work for nearly a year by this point, you can't find that part time
> job (after all, they didn't hire you when you weren't a student,
> either) because you're overqualified
Kevin pointed out one solution, which I also heard as a student, for those who are "overqualified".
> (and you have a fairly impressive
> resume). Try to lie on it, and you will get caught and in all
> likelihood fired.
Is not mentioning experience or education a "lie"?
> So it isn't that easy to just regear; most people I
> know who have done it had spouses with a good salary, or had access to
> some good career resources (that many companies supply when they fire
> you).
I still remember the way I felt when I was unemployed. That was back when I generally felt so bad I
used to want to kill myself during much of university. So I am able to sympathize. But you are quite
fortunate to have such an understanding and capable wife. I was fortunate to have sensitive parents.
Most breadwinner men probably do not have that choice.
> > > Note that this male mindset
> >
> > Note the FEMALE mindset when giving up on work after one year, or ONLY
> > getting a junior college
> > education, not sticking out crap jobs or job searches or pursuing
> > competitive university education
> > like the men, and not working the same hours, sometimes to the detriment of > their health.
>
> What women do you know?
Hundreds just like I describe. I know because they will even openly tell me so about themselves.
> Most women I know in professional careers went
> to Junior College
Most women I know in professional careers went to university. They are schoolteachers, government
workers, physicians and things like that, not like the hundreds of flighty OLs or freeters I know, and
those professional women have my utmost respect. Too bad more women, and even men, are not like them.
Japan wouldn't be so screwed up.
> because, at the time (mid 80s/early 90s) that was
> what they were strongly advised to do. And many Junior Colleges are
> better respected than four-year institutions. That aside, they still
> work the same hours men do (or are told to go home because they aren't
> given the same amount of work to do in the first place),
I believe in equal pay for equal work, or advancement for exceptional work. This doesn't sound like it.
> stick to crap jobs (my s-i-l did)
Sorry, she didn't. Near 100% of men I know do stick it out, no matter HOW bad their jobs are, even if
they do not have families to support. Cuz see, they're men. I stick it out to take responsibility for
choices I've made and fulfill my duty to my family.
> and eventually grow so disillusioned that they
> become 'freeters' or some other type of social parasite,
The vast majority of men don't.
> and do suffer
> many of the same health problems men do (except, perhaps, the
> smoking/drinking related illnesses, which as we all know have precious
> little to do with actual work).
So why is karoshi almost all men (I've seen the publicized figures)? So why aren't the men quitters
like the women despite suffering the same or even more disillusionment when they ALSO find the job is
not what they expected or wanted, or in the face of this economy? I hear the men complain about their
jobs or how little free time they have, or how worried about their futures and finances they are. They
don't quit. I do know one single, childless, middle aged man who quit a career in Tokyo after 30 years,
but he had mental health problems and he now takes care of his octogenarian parents with their own
health problems. I do not begrudge him for what he did.
> > Major
> > reasons for the obvious differences in "men's" work and "women's" work in
> > Japan. It is wrong to
> > discriminate against an applicant just because she is a woman before giving
> > her a chance, but men
> > and women are quite different in Japan.
> >
> I know. And that's the problem. Moreover, that mindset is the problem.
Yes, Japanese women's mindset perpetuates old fashioned views of women. The majority support
traditional gender roles themselves, as I've seen in recently released survey. Quite frankly, women's
views in Japan have made me lose sympathy for most of them. Only women who are prepared to be
responsible for themselves should be helped. Women who PLAN on being parasites, freeters, or housewives
from the beginning, do not need good education or employment opportunities like enjoyed in other
countries. It would save me a lot of time and money if my daughter and son wanted to be freeters or
homemakers.
> From the start women are often not given the same chances men are,
> and, though it's changing, are generally given less attention than the
> men (how many girl's high school sports, for example, get national
> attention twice a year, including major network TV coverage).
They don't in the US, either. Yet see the difference in the women. I saw the American professional
women's football league featured on Japanese TV. It is so minor that the women must take to the streets
to sell the tickets and do the promotion themselves. Unlike the men who earn hundreds of thousands or
millions of dollars, they may get $175 per game. When not playing, they train and take care of their
families. They stick it out. And they were gaining respect and popularity. They didn't sit at home to
live off their husbands or parents.
> > > is the reason that I most likely will never get to
> > > permanently live in Japan again, because my wife knows she can succeed
> > > faster and more easily in America.
> >
> > That is true. But your wife is also willing to get a valuable education
>
> In AMERICA. Most of the female PhDs I know from Japan that work in the
> US really don't want to return.
If such women aren't going to change Japan, who will?
And women in Japan such as doctors, government workers or school teachers, are also rewarded for their
efforts with benefits such as job security even if they do get married or have children.
> One is a surgeon, and is facing losing
> her career because she chose to have a baby.
Losing her job in America? Would she be able to sue? Seriously.
> > and
> > stick out a job search
> > more than one year, without giving up.
>
> Actually she went to one of the nation's best universities, so she
> didn't really have to 'search' for a job too hard.
Then it is kind of regrettable that she did not stay to affect change in Japan or be a role model for
Japanese women. Yes, your wife will be a role model for your niece. I hope it will not inspire your
niece to grow disillusioned or escape from Japan like too many young people do.
> > She is even willing to be the breadwinner of your family.
>
> Unfortunately she has no choice on this one. If you asked her, she
> would gladly give up this responsibility.
I am not going to express sympathy here, because despite it being sad, that is just how husbands and
wives in other countries live. If your wife were a more typical Japanese woman, you wouldn't have a
choice about working, either, no matter how bad the economy.
Ryan Ginstrom
one
> of those women who enjoy work, and explicitly feels bored at home with the
> kids. Work for my wife and child care for my kids is best for all
involved.
Aren't you the guy who forced his wife to get off unemployment because she
was just sponging off the system?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?F54524B25
Dude, here all this time I thought you were a real man for putting your wife
in her place. Now it turns out she wanted to work the whole time? You just
slipped off your pedestal, buddy.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>
> > How do you know they are not being manhandled, when it would be usual for
> > chikan to try not to be seen
>
> Put it this way; I've seen more pickpockets
What did you do? I've never witnessed pickpockets or chikan.
> (who are trying even harder not
> to be seen) than chikan. It is almost impossible for a person who is being
> touched up not to react in some way or other, and I've seen it often enough
> but, strange as it may seem, not in trains in Japan. I've seen several
> situations where women were having a heavy trip laid on them by a man who
> was either accompanying them or who had latched on before they came into my
> orbit, and have to say that that is one of the few situations in which, in
> my experience, bystanders have seen fit to intervene.
>
> > So street wise man, did you ever read any surveys on victimization by
> chikan?
>
> Do you have to be street wise to read surveys?
No, but if your eyes and ears were open like you said, you might notice that
the real Japan is not your own life.
> > In one I read in a front page national news story (Yomiuri, perhaps) while
> > still on the JET Program, over three quarters of female respondents down
> to
> > junior high age concentrated in the Tokyo area reported being victimized
> by
> > chikan.
>
> Surveys also show that over half of US women report sexual harassment in the
> workplace, so shall we just amend Ernest Schaal's
>
> > In japan, chikan is the rule for men, not the exception
>
> to
>
> > In japan, as (to only a slightly lesser degree) in the United States,
> chikan is the rule for men, not the exception
>
> and move on?
Why the clumsy attempt at deflection again? Yes, sexual harassment and
continuing inequality, among many other things, are problems in the US. I
gladly tell people about America's problem myself, and I openly criticize
America and Americans myself. Yet look at the difference in the status,
attitudes or achievements of women in the US and Japan if you are ever going to
make an issue of which discrimination or which system or society is worse.
But we were talking about Japan, Japanese politicians, and Japanese people and
their problems, not America.
Eric Takabayashi
> "Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> > own income, and NOT be tied to the home or babysitting all day. My wife is
> one
> > of those women who enjoy work, and explicitly feels bored at home with the
> > kids. Work for my wife and child care for my kids is best for all
> involved.
>
> Aren't you the guy who forced his wife to get off unemployment because she
> was just sponging off the system?
>
> http://makeashorterlink.com/?F54524B25
No. Just made her do it faster. She said unemployment was available for three
months.
Ernest Schaal
eta...@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 7/6/03 9:24 PM:
> Ernest Schaal wrote:
>
>> Okay, so Bush's statements may accurately reflect public opinion in his own
>> country. So what? What does that have to do with the topic of sexism,
>> specifically Japanese sexism? It would be nice if you could occasionally say
>> on topic.
>
> Go back and learn for yourself who brought up Bush and Americans, to see who I
> was responding to before you jumped back in.
Why should I, when you can provide me with that information easily? After
all, Eric, the world does not revolve around you and the world does not have
to obey your every command.
>> I don't know which message you were talking about, since your message isn't
>> very specific, is it?
>
> Why don't you look and see the post I was responding to?
>
> I thought lawyers were alleged to be in the top 1% of IQ.
Could I look it up? Yes I could.
Should I look it up? No, I have other things to do rather than spend hours
trying to decipher your cryptic messages.
You can easily give me the information you referred to, if you thought it
was important. The fact that you can't be bothered to do it tells me that
either the information is not there or that it isn't important even for you
to be bothered with. If it is too unimportant for you to include in your
message, why should I waste my time looking it up?
>> Anyway, you might not be the one who started the
>> diversion, but you are the one who continued it.
>>
>> Can I assume that you have ANY views on the topic on the subject denoted by
>> the title?
>
> Why don't you go back in the post and read what I had to say about the
> politicians' statements before I began responding to other posts trying to
> deflect attention from Japanese politicians and Japanese views?
If you have any views on the topic you can state them, otherwise I consider
your messages waste of bandwidth.
Ernest Schaal
jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com wrote on 7/6/03 9:38 PM:
Not quarrelsome, simply disgusted with your antics. When I first read your
first message in this thread I was struck with how politically correct you
were, with your telling me that it was unfair to call the sexist attitude of
some Japanese politicians "immature," since that was somehow applying
"Western" standards to an "Asian" culture.
Then there was the paragraph that began "I'm not sticking up for the
comments made (especially the moronic comments about rape you cited in an
earlier posting), but..." Whenever I read something that starts with "I'm
not sticking up for ..., but" I know that the rest of the message will be
sticking up for the thing you said you weren't going to stick up for. Sure
enough, the rest of your message tried to do just that.
Ernest Schaal
for women only and why are there all those posters telling women to complain
if they are molested?
in article be95m3$2gaao$1...@ID-169501.news.dfncis.de, John Yamamoto-Wilson at
jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com wrote on 7/6/03 9:39 PM:
Ernest Schaal
Webster at rgw_n...@knot.mine.nu wrote on 7/6/03 9:47 PM:
> In article <BB2D582B.433E%esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp>,
> Ernest Schaal <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
>
>> Actually, I heard it from a variety of sources, including my wife, a friend,
>> and an opinion article in the Japan Times.
>
> And they all said that women "would never give birth in Japan because
> the Japanese male-dominate (sic) medical profession dismisses their pain
> as unimportant"? Your addition of "in Japan" here is interesting, as
> well as the fact that you did not specify Japanese women (although the
> latter could perhaps be assumed).
I used "in Japan" because in Western countries, like the US, the medical
profession will supply the necessary pain medication and will teach
breathing methods to control the pain.
>> As to your point about the third world countries, social customs have an
>> overpowering force there. In Japan, social customs are weakening, and
>> Japanese women have woke up to the fact that they have choices, including
>> the choice not to have children if that means having them without pain
>> medication. It is similar to the Indian women who are waking up to their
>> choices and are fight back against brutal Indian customs, like burning wives
>> who don't bring enough dowry.
>
> Ah, so Japanese women *do* want to have children, it's just that one day
> they suddenly woke up and thought, "hang that, I might want a child, but
> not that much," and started to refuse impregnation?
>
> The lack of pain-control here is the constant, so it must be some other
> factor that has changed, and in fact you point it out yourself: The low
> birth-rate in Japan is due to the fact that social customs are
> weakening. Japanese women just don't want to have children that much,
> and refuse to sacrifice their own personal interests, and now Japanese
> society lets them make this choice.
I am not saying the denial of paid medication is the only reason for the low
birth rate, but it is a factor, along with other factors like lack of
sufficient day-care facilities.
> Let's completely ignore the large financial burden that comes with
> raising a child in Japan, that certainly has nothing to do with it.
>
> BTW, I like the way you compare this issue to immolation of Indian
> brides. It really helps to make Japanese men - not just doctors,
> because after all, they are all part of this conspiracy, eh - seem more
> evil and diabolical.
Not so much a conspiracy as a mindset. The American medical system used to
have similar attitudes, but they advanced.
> So from this comparison of yours I suppose you think the large number of
> women who decide to give birth without the use of pain-killers are
> suicidal masochists who have made a choice on par with setting
> themselves on fire?
Rodney, you imply that the women made a choice to do without pain-killers,
rather than the pain-killers or pain-relieving techniques not being
available.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> Not quarrelsome, simply disgusted with your antics. When I first read your
> first message in this thread I was struck with how politically correct you
> were, with your telling me that it was unfair to call the sexist attitude
of
> some Japanese politicians "immature," since that was somehow applying
> "Western" standards to an "Asian" culture.
Say what you like about Japanese politicians. I doubt even your worst
epithets will come close to the truth. But what you *actually* said was:
> Clearly, the
> Japanese have a LONG way to go before the reach maturity.
Not "some Japanese politicians", but the Japanese as a whole. That is what
I objected to. Again, if you could remember what you actually said it would
make arguing with you a bit less pointless.
> Then there was the paragraph that began "I'm not sticking up for the
> comments made (especially the moronic comments about rape you cited in an
> earlier posting), but..." Whenever I read something that starts with "I'm
> not sticking up for ..., but" I know that the rest of the message will be
> sticking up for the thing you said you weren't going to stick up for. Sure
> enough, the rest of your message tried to do just that.
Nope. I think Mori's comment sucks. I just wanted to put it in a context,
that's all.
John Yamamoto-Wilson
> > This just feeds my suspicion that what's behind this is resentment that
> > Japanese women have found another way to get a good deal for themselves.
Ryan Ginstrom replied:
> It is a pretty low rung on the ladder to Enlightenment (which, BTW,
> culminates with a multi-oku yen contract to grunt in genki-drink
> commercials) if you set yourself upon some kind of self-proclaimed moral
> high ground, then bitch and whine when everybody doesn't follow your
> sterling lead.
I could respond better if I knew what the heck you were talking about.
Kevin Gowen
The thing is, what you say with irony, I believe with conviction. This is
why I have little sympathy for people who whine about trying to rear
children while working for minimum wage. If you are so unskilled as to not
be able to earn a decent wage, you have no business having children.
It's a mystery as to why India, the place of burning brides, has such a high
birth rate. I am pretty sure they don't dole out painkillers left and right.
--
Kevin Gowen
"The US economy accounts for about one-third of global GDP-greater than
the next four countries combined (Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom
and France)."
- "Advancing the National Interest: Australia's Foreign and Trade
Policy White Paper", Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Kevin Gowen
> Ernest Schaal wrote:
>
>> While I did not support the invasion of Iraq, I realize the
>> difference between bringing down a tyrant
>
> So why doesn't the US bring down other tyrants who are better able to
> put up a fight like Kim Jong-Il, or more importantly, don't have oil?
1. I have never understood the purpose of such questions. Is the purpose to
advocate the US invading more countries or to criticize previous invasions?
Such questions also assume that every international circumstance and
relationship is the same.
2. Why do people talk about oil as if it were a bad reason to go to war?
It's also getting a bit stale. They were shouting "No blood for oil" to
protest the Vietnam Conflict, for the love of Pete.
Kevin Gowen
> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>
>> I thought lawyers were alleged to be in the top 1% of IQ.
I must say that I have never heard this claim that Eric has made.
> Oh, God, he's another lawyer, is he? What is it that attracts lawyers
> to this group?
I have always thought that Ernie was our only lawyer.
> I, for one, could do without constant reminders of why
> Bleak House is such a compelling read.
What's Bleak House?
Michael Cash
<esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
>If chikan is not the rule, then why do the commuter trains have special cars
>for women only
I thought these were still somewhat of a rarity...but then again, I
don't ride the trains. Have these become the norm now?
>and why are there all those posters telling women to complain
>if they are molested?
Ummm.....Because 1) so many of them don't 2) it's easier than putting
forth an active police presence and 3) gives the impression that
something is being done about the problem?
If that ain't the answer, then I'm stumped.
--
Michael Cash
"There was a time, Mr. Cash, when I believed you must be the most useless
thing in the world. But that was before I read a Microsoft help file."
Prof. Ernest T. Bass
Mount Pilot College
Ernest Schaal
mike...@sunfield.ne.jp wrote on 7/7/03 6:18 AM:
> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 05:26:10 +0900, Ernest Schaal
> <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
>
>> If chikan is not the rule, then why do the commuter trains have special cars
>> for women only
>
> I thought these were still somewhat of a rarity...but then again, I
> don't ride the trains. Have these become the norm now?
I have seen them in a variety of cities, so I assume they are now the norm.
>
>> and why are there all those posters telling women to complain
>> if they are molested?
>
> Ummm.....Because 1) so many of them don't 2) it's easier than putting
> forth an active police presence and 3) gives the impression that
> something is being done about the problem?
>
> If that ain't the answer, then I'm stumped.
You don't see them in the US, do you?
Kevin Gowen
> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:<3F079E22...@yahoo.co.jp>...
>> the market were so stacked against me, as it indeed is now after ten
>> years in Japan, I would go back to school for a new education, and
>> look for a new job, even if it means starting a totally brand new
>> career such as nursing as a man at 40 with a wife and two children
>> to support. I see what laid off men, or men who quit unsatisfying
>> jobs in mid career do.
>
> One thing I love to hear is what employed people will do when they are
> unemployed. Let me educate you. For starters, you continue to think
> that you will soon be employed. After six months or so, it becomes
> obvious that things are not going according to Hoyle, so you look for
> education.
Oh man, another person who swallowed the "education is the key to
employment" hook. Let me get this straight: After six months of
unemployment, a person decides to worsen their financial condition by
purchasing education?
> But, of course, there are admission deadlines,
> restrictions, etc., so it's not all that easy to just go back to
> school. There is, of course, technical education; but the cost is
> prohibitive (and student loans, too, have certain deadlines and
> restrictions), and you still have to find some work while you study so
> that you can pay the bills. But since you haven't been able to get
> work for nearly a year by this point, you can't find that part time
> job (after all, they didn't hire you when you weren't a student,
> either) because you're overqualified (and you have a fairly impressive
> resume). Try to lie on it, and you will get caught and in all
> likelihood fired.
Try jobs that don't require resumes, like retail outlets, convenience
stores, and so forth.
>> Major
>> reasons for the obvious differences in "men's" work and "women's"
>> work in
>> Japan. It is wrong to
>> discriminate against an applicant just because she is a woman before
>> giving
>> her a chance, but men
>> and women are quite different in Japan.
>>
> I know. And that's the problem. Moreover, that mindset is the problem.
> From the start women are often not given the same chances men are,
And this cut both ways.
> and, though it's changing, are generally given less attention than the
> men (how many girl's high school sports, for example, get national
> attention twice a year, including major network TV coverage).
That is people do not want to watch them as much. Major TV networks show
things that will attract viewers. That is why there is always a big to-do
about getting big name events such as the Olympic Games and the Superbowl.
This is why ABC affiliates decided to air the movie "Gladiator" instead of
the Democratic candidates debate at University of South Carolina. TV
networks air the programs that draw the most viewers, not the ones that
advance some vague agenda.
Kevin Gowen
> In article <be7f1m$22490$1...@ID-105084.news.dfncis.de>,
> "Kevin Gowen" <kgowen...@myfastmail.com> wrote:
>
>> While this story is unfortunate, the upside is that your
>> dedicated, and capable mother.
>
> Personally, I would say that we can only assume that she is
> "intelligent", and the two other qualities do not necessarily follow.
I can only take Goober at his word, although I of course concede that her
dedication and capability in the work force do not necessarily transfer to
her parenting skills.
Kevin Gowen
Omit some of your education from the applications.
Kevin Gowen
> in article ad4hgvgc82osiqbmc...@4ax.com, Michael Cash at
> mike...@sunfield.ne.jp wrote on 7/7/03 6:18 AM:
>
>> On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 05:26:10 +0900, Ernest Schaal
>> <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> belched the alphabet and kept on going
>> with:
>>
>>> If chikan is not the rule, then why do the commuter trains have
>>> special cars for women only
>>
>> I thought these were still somewhat of a rarity...but then again, I
>> don't ride the trains. Have these become the norm now?
>
> I have seen them in a variety of cities, so I assume they are now the
> norm.
Did your wife translate for you, or were they also labeled in English,
"Ladies Only Car"?
John R. Yamamoto- Wilson
> > I've seen more pickpockets
Eric Takabayashi asked:
> What did you do?
There's not usually very much one *can* do. The first time I saw it in
Japan, for instance, all I saw was one man *giving* another man a wallet. If
I wasn't (don't sneer!) "street wise" I wouldn't have known what that was
about. I didn't at the time speak enough Japanese to be able to express
myself very clearly, and said something a bit garbled, like "Dorobou to
omouimasu!" but no one paid any attention for about ten minutes. Then
someone started going through his pockets and grumbling, but the perps had
got out long before.
The second time, I saw a woman relieved of her purse. I told her what I'd
seen and who did it, but also warned her that he'd have passed it along to
his friend by now, which was true enough; he emptied out his pockets with an
air of aggrieved innocence to show he was clean.
> I've never witnessed pickpockets or chikan.
Thank you, Eric. Precisely my point. I doubt whether Ernest Schaal has
either. So it's not just in my blinkered view of Japan that "the norm" for
people in trains is to be snoozing, reading newspapers, listening to
Walkmans, etc., and it is *not* the norm for them to be either the
perpetrators or victims of sexual groping? QED.
And before you fall back on your statistics, forget it. They just don't cut
it. Most people in the UK have had something stolen at least once in their
lives, but that doesn't make theft "the norm".
To say that chikan is the norm for Japanese men is distorted and prejudiced.
I really cannot imagine any of my male colleagues, my male students or my
male neighbours engaging in such behaviour. OK, I can't vouch for what
someone might do if very drunk on the last train home, but to suggest that
such perversion is mainstream is, frankly, pernicious.
I'm not trying to say that sexual harassment isn't a problem here in Japan,
and I am not condoning it in any way. On the contrary, I'd give very short
shrift to any offender that ever crossed my path. But that's a long way from
saying that it is "the norm" for Japanese men to behave like that.
> if your eyes and ears were open like you said, you might notice that
> the real Japan is not your own life.
Eric, you just said it yourself; *you have never seen chikan behaviour*. How
much more wide-open do you want my eyes to be here?
> Why the clumsy attempt at deflection again? Yes, sexual harassment and
> continuing inequality, among many other things, are problems in the US.
[snip]
> But we were talking about Japan, Japanese politicians, and Japanese
> people and their problems, not America.
How can I convey the point that *every* country has these problems, and that
sexual harassment is no more "the norm" in Japan than anywhere else without
making comparisons with other countries?
We have someone saying that sexual groping is the norm in Japan. That
someone is rude and racist and I'll bet there's a better than 50% chance
he's kinpatsu, so he's very likely American (as you point out in another
thread, these are apparently characteristics of the culture ;-)), so
comparisons with America are surely germane to the discussion. And if anyone
wants to start throwing mud at the Brits, or other nationalities, that's
fine too. As I said before, no country comes out of this rosy.
Louise Bremner
> >> If chikan is not the rule, then why do the commuter trains have special
> >> cars for women only
> >
> > I thought these were still somewhat of a rarity...but then again, I
> > don't ride the trains. Have these become the norm now?
>
> I have seen them in a variety of cities, so I assume they are now the norm.
Can you name those cities?
________________________________________________________________________
Louise Bremner (log at gol dot com)
If you want a reply by e-mail, don't write to my Yahoo address!
John R. Yamamoto- Wilson
http://digital.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=1023
--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com
Dave Fossett
> Ernest Schaal <esc...@max.hi-ho.ne.jp> wrote:
>
> > I have seen them in a variety of cities, so I assume they are now the
norm.
>
> Can you name those cities?
Outside Tokyo, operators in Yokohama, Osaka, Kobe, and Fukuoka all provide
women-only cars. I would hardly call them "the norm", though, as in Tokyo,
they only operate late at night, and still only on a few lines.
--
Dave Fossett
Saitama, Japan
Declan Murphy
Nagoya has them too, morning and evening. Don't the Tokyo lines
operating women-only carriages provide them in the mornings too?
--
"Forget Spanish. There's nothing in that language worth reading except
Don Quixote, and a quick listen to the CD of Man of La Mancha will take
care of that. Who speaks it that you are really desperate to talk to?
The help? Your leaf blower? Study French or German, where there are at
least a few books worth reading, or if you're American, try English."
Dame Edna Everage
"If you have to explain satire to someone, you might as well give up,"
Barry Humphries
Declan Murphy
> in article ad4hgvgc82osiqbmc...@4ax.com, Michael Cash at
> mike...@sunfield.ne.jp wrote on 7/7/03 6:18 AM:
>>Ummm.....Because 1) so many of them don't 2) it's easier than putting
>>forth an active police presence and 3) gives the impression that
>>something is being done about the problem?
>>
>>If that ain't the answer, then I'm stumped.
>
> You don't see them in the US, do you?
Out of curiousity though, how many US cities have mass-transit subway
systems comparable to those in Japan or with London, Paris etc? NYC?
East coast only?
Declan Murphy
> Rodney Webster wrote:
>>Damnit, if only those poor people would stop breeding like rabbits we
>>wouldn't have so many poor people in the first place!
>
> The thing is, what you say with irony, I believe with conviction.
Ooh the irony of the ironically challenged claiming to spot irony! I LUV IT.
> If you are so unskilled as to not
> be able to earn a decent wage, you have no business having children.
> It's a mystery as to why India, the place of burning brides, has such a high
> birth rate. I am pretty sure they don't dole out painkillers left and right.
On the contrary, in countries without a comprehensive welfare safety
net, it is considered rational behaviour for poor people (particularly
in rural areas with poorer services, and anywhere there is a high infant
mortality rate) to have as many children as possible. The children are
useful for planting and harvesting crops, and as they don't need to go
to school (elementary education is not compulsory in India, and not
free, and not encouraged for certain caste) are not considered expensive
to raise.
In the case of rural India, there is a good chance that at least some of
the children will survive to adulthood and be able to support their
parents in their old age. In the absence of a universal old age pension,
having children to depend upon is the only reliable alternative to
starving to death in later years.
Just as was the case in most western countries prior to the introduction
of comprehensive welfare safety nets. Since you have a lot of time on
your hands, have a look at fertility and mortality rates for native born
citizens of western countries between 1750-1920, and then compare those
with 1920-2000.
John R. Yamamoto- Wilson
> > And everywhere might become so much like everywhere else
> > that we can't tell the difference.
Eric Takabayashi replied:
> I did not claim that and you know that is not what was meant.
I know, but I can't resist taking a bit of a rise out of you from time to
time. Your weighty seriousness makes it almost obligatory for *someone* to
throw in a counterbalance. Please don't take it amiss. I don't disrespect
your views, even if I frequently disagree with them.
> Is your angle keeping women down and dependent on men, unable to even free
> themselves from an unhappy marriage because they had not prepared
themselves
> to take better care of themselves? Do you simply accept women as victims?
Why
> don't you want them AND their society to change for the better?
I don't want to keep people down, nor do I accept women as victims, and it
is certainly wrong to say that I don't want Japanese women and their society
to change for the better. It is simply that I do not think that Japan
becoming (yet) more Americanised and espousing (yet) more American values
can necessarily be equated with Japan becoming "better".
> Your attitude feeds my suspicion you want women held down.
We seem to be suspecting each other of this!
> Are you sure you are
> not excusing the Japanese politicians for their public statements?
Absolutely sure. I find them contemptible.
> it seems recently I don't know a single middle aged or elderly married
> woman who actually likes being married, because I hear so often they'd
LIKE
> to be divorced or living abroad alone, freed from their husbands or even
their
> kids. So why don't they do something about it like women in other
countries
> did, and like women even in Japan do, even in this poor economy?
Well, you've pointed out that more and more older women are leaving their
surprised spouses, so presumably they *are* doing something about it.
I have an anecdote here, though, which may be instructive. Across the way
from us there used to be a bicycle shop, run by a family. The woman,
especially, was a delightful person, and we used often to stop by for a chat
with her, her husband or her son. Then, when her son reached adulthood, she
upped and left. Gradually, the father became morose, the son became
withdrawn, business slackened off and finally the shop closed down.
Repeat that on a national scale and you've got a problem. As I tried to say
before, Japan has built itself up on the model of "behind every successful
[male] economic unit is a woman pushing". As more women continue to assert
their freedom and independence in this way, more men are going to fall to
pieces, more economic units are going to become disfunctional and, while I
disagree with them as much as you do, and would look for a radical and
forward-looking solution, I can quite see why reactionary politicians would
seek to uphold the old order (=women at home, doing their "duty").
> You mean worldwide that people who want money or more money, do not work
for it
> at outside jobs? They just live off their husbands or parents like
Japanese
> women? That would come to a surprise for the majority of western women.
No, I mean that, by and large, people will follow the line of least
resistance.
> You could know even the basics of mizu shobai if you were as street wise
as you
> claimed.
I learned to be street wise in Spain, and merely apply my knowledge here. Of
course, though, I'm taking a bit of a rise out of you again. Yes, I have
some idea of the discreet charm of the bourgeoisie and its modus operandi.
> Chinese street walkers (personally I've heard of Latinos) are hardly
> representative of the Japanese sex trade. Do you not even get the sex
industry
> fliers in your mailbox or see ads in the papers or posters on the streets?
Nope. Used to get the fliers when we lived in an apartment, don't read that
kind of paper and live in an area that appears to be relatively free of
fly-posters. All that comes into my orbit these days is the Chinese street
walkers, who have increased greatly in number in the last three years.
Latinos (or, rather, Latin*a*s) would be a relief; at least I could answer
them in their own language.
> Or do you hang around certain areas of Kabukicho?
No.
> > Oddly enough, Eric, I suspect you are right,
>
> Then why not simply say so, and not spend so much time standing up for
such old
> fashioned or inefficient ways and defending those who make such
inflammatory
> statements about women.
I am not standing up for them or defending them, and will be happy to see
them go. However, I don't want to see them replaced by yet more
Americanisation of Japanese culture. Japan has already gone too far down
that road. I'd like to see Japan develop in its own way and on its own
terms. That way, when the day comes that I buy a plane ticket to the US, I
won't just be going from a cultural satellite to the main node.
> > but try telling *them* that -
>
> I do tell them. Mostly I get the same excuses that you give.
You need to separate out my observations from my endorsements. I'm mostly
pointing out what the objections are, not saying I agree with those
objections. The principal thing I object to is the idea that Westerners who
think Japan has "a long way to go" seek to recreate the country in their own
image.
> Oh, you mean like the men who made some interesting public statements,
whom you
> are defending?
Don't know where you get the idea that I'm defending them.
> > The decision-making machinery here is
> > based on the idea that if it worked once it will work forever and any
> > policy, once adopted, is set to run on zircon rails forever.
>
> If you believe that is not the case, why don't you try pointing that out?
I do, but the outcome I'm looking forward to is a reassertion/redefinition
of the *Japanese* identity, not the imposition of some kind of external
model.
> some of Japan's more significant rights like women's suffrage
> came about as a result of losing a war they started
Like the British Empire, there is something to be said for US influence in
Japan after WWII, but quite a lot to be said against it. And, of course, it
is impossible to know what direction things might have taken without it.
> Are you agreeing with me, or claiming I don't know that Japanese women are
> willing to fight for the rights they want to have?
I'm saying I know some pretty determined women who've taken a pretty
determined stand in a variety of situations and my classrooms are bursting
with people who are set to make their mark. I have confidence in them.
> It took well over a century in the US. It really took off about three
decades
> ago, and still continues today. I expect it will take Japanese women till
my
> daughter grows up to get their act together. I am not worried about my
> daughter, but if she turns her back on the opportunities available to
women
> even today, and makes the choice to be a freeter or housewife (of course I
> would allow it) she'd better be prepared to live with that decision.
Beyond
> graduation, "parasite" is one option not open to my children.
Spoken like a true Protestant!
> pardon my saying so, but excusing politicians who make idiot statements,
> criticizing foreigners who would criticize those idiot statements, making
> excuses for why people would CHOOSE not to achieve, or accusing me of
being
> jealous or cold because I would have people with choices be more
responsible,
> for THEIR own good; is not the way.
If I have given the impression that I am excusing the idiot politicians then
allow me to correct it. They are idiots. If I have given the impression that
I am making excuses for people who choose not to achieve then allow me to
correct it. I see their choices as comprehensible - even inevitable - given
the structures they are working in, but do not therefore think they are
desirable. If I have given the impression that I don't have much sympathy
with people who have *their* model, imposed from outside and largely based
on Western values, who think they know what the Japanese (male or female)
should do "for their own good" then at least I scored one out of three.
Ryan Ginstrom
"John R. Yamamoto- Wilson" <jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
> I am not standing up for them or defending them, and will be happy to see
> them go. However, I don't want to see them replaced by yet more
> Americanisation of Japanese culture. Japan has already gone too far down
> that road. I'd like to see Japan develop in its own way and on its own
> terms. That way, when the day comes that I buy a plane ticket to the US, I
> won't just be going from a cultural satellite to the main node.
Just out of curiosity, what aspects of Japanese culture do you think are
Americanized?
By the way, have you ever been to Spain Mura?
http://www.parque-net.com/index0.html
Do you think that that little corner of Japan has turned into a miniature
copy of Spain?
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Ryan Ginstrom
"John Yamamoto-Wilson" <jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in message
news:bea2f3$2r5s5> > > > This just feeds my suspicion that what's behind
this is resentment that
> > > Japanese women have found another way to get a good deal for
themselves.
Ryan Ginstrom replied:
>
> > It is a pretty low rung on the ladder to Enlightenment (which, BTW,
> > culminates with a multi-oku yen contract to grunt in genki-drink
> > commercials) if you set yourself upon some kind of self-proclaimed moral
> > high ground, then bitch and whine when everybody doesn't follow your
> > sterling lead.
>
> I could respond better if I knew what the heck you were talking about.
No need to respond to everything, John. Besides, this was directed not at
you, but at the resentment to which you referred.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Kevin Gowen
> "John R. Yamamoto- Wilson" <jo...@rarebooksinjapan.com> wrote in
> message
>> I am not standing up for them or defending them, and will be happy
>> to see them go. However, I don't want to see them replaced by yet
>> more Americanisation of Japanese culture. Japan has already gone too
>> far down that road. I'd like to see Japan develop in its own way and
>> on its own terms. That way, when the day comes that I buy a plane
>> ticket to the US, I won't just be going from a cultural satellite to
>> the main node.
>
> Just out of curiosity, what aspects of Japanese culture do you think
> are Americanized?
>
> By the way, have you ever been to Spain Mura?
> http://www.parque-net.com/index0.html
I have!
> Do you think that that little corner of Japan has turned into a
> miniature copy of Spain?
I felt like I was in my ancestral hometowns.