Comments on Libation Kowloon: Protecting Human Rights is Dangerous!?

Okay, my first comments are directed not at the in...

2009-01-05T13:16:00.000+09:00

Okay, my first comments are directed not at the initial subject, but at a couple of comments.

"Considering the chaos that the application of human rights legislation has caused in the UK, where it has been used mainly to protect criminals..."
I'm a firm believer in "an eye for an eye". Do to someone what they did wrong. However, I also believe in people having a chance to reform- and whilst I think that the prisons are now far too "cushy", the alternative described for the other country in question (Japan, from several sources) are worse, in my opinion. And apparently- although I go only by what I've been told here- America's prisons are actually desirable, to the point of people commiting crimes in order to go to jail.
Neither is acceptable. Happy medium isn't there, but needs to be. However- with human rights legislation being properly implemented- that medium could be found.

"People who live on islands (Japan, the UK) just need to grow up and realize the rest of the world is different because we're not as naive."
...Excuse me? The UK is unable to accept the differences of others? There is less racial segregation than in America (and I'm talking about "chosen" segregation, not legally inforced segregation- black/white neighborhoods etc) and we accept homosexuality much more. This seemed to be the view of a single person, but I couldn't let it slide.

...Right, now on to the subject matter. In a very confused manner, because it's 3:30AM.

"People will feel pressured to "pretend" they don`t think in a certain way. Their actual thoughts and feelings will not change - and in fact, I feel they will get worse. I think that something similar has happened in the US - in particular, Equal Opportunity."
Yes. I will agree on this- people in America- and to a lesser extent (with different issues, not race) in the UK- there have been a variety of reactions.
One of the first is going to be a fear of appearing to being discriminatory. Yes, it will induce a level of concern- make people, in fact, more inclined to hire someone who may more commonly be discriminated against, purely to avoid looking as though they are discriminating.
The second is that those who view this "minority" (we'll assume it's a minority, simply to make it easier in discussion) as only being able to get these jobs because of the circumstances outlined above. What I mean is that- let's use race, a black man, as an example. (I use blacks because they've been probably the most widely discriminated against race; and a man so as to avoid complicating the scenario with sexism.) If the black man is genuinely better for the job than the other applicants, and thus gets hired, the other applicants- who are racially native to the country and (as we're trying to understand the feelings of a racist) therefore view the black man as an "outsider" regardless of nationality, may- and often will- assume that the black man got it purely to avoid discrimination. As a result, the racist person will be more so, not less, due to resentment.
My point here is that you can't change people's minds with a law. But if it's implemented very well and equally carefully, you can protect those that may need it- native to the country and otherwise.

Next, onto those that comment on the amount of discrimination- well, I've never been to Japan, so I'm going to pull some resources from various different accounts. And yes, I've read several.
I know of a lady who (with her gaijin husband) moved to Japan to teach English. They were in the same home for seventeen years; got friendly with the landlord. The floors needed replacing; and the landlord got some workmen in to do them. The husband took a couple of photos of the work-in-progress for the sake of interest and discussion.
However, the workmen spoke to the landlord, who came to the lady in question in fear of their intending to sue them. She was shocked at this and asked why; and the assumption was due to their nationality (American). Seventeen years of their being close neighbours and he still looked at her as gaijin first.
Now, this isn't blatent discrimination; nor is it anything that violates any rights at all. But it is sad and says a lot about how gaijin's aren't really accepted, no matter how long they live in Japan.
The same lady and her husband was also stopped by a policeman who demanded to know where their bikes were from and if they were stolen. And apparently, yes, he did make a point of stopping foreigners to check.
Now, I'm quoting this source simply because I have more to work with- but I've heard more, and worse. Some of them are perfect examples of why Japan would need a human rights constitution- namely, those involving jail and being detained.

There is one other thing I want to say on the view on Koreans in Japan. The basic view is that most Koreans now living in Japan are descended from slaves which were brought to Japan; and that the Japanese should accept them because they were born there. All I have to say is that it took the black descendants of slaves a long time to be accepted as well- we can't comdemn a culture for making a mistake our own did in the past. We should just hope they learn from ours and wise up faster than we did.

Last thing is that Japan is a very insular culture- but to those of you who are saying, "well, if they don't want anyone else, leave 'em to it"- clearly they do. They want the tourism trade (money), they want to trade their wares with other countries (money), and they want to import stuff from other countries (goods). In other words, Japan would collapse without any level of foreign relations- indeed, wouldn't most developed countries?
Clearly, they can't distance themselves entirely- in fact, it's beneficial for them to have foreigners come to their country and teach English. The more Japanese people that can speak English, the more ways they have to bring in trade- both import, export, and tourism. And that, of course, leads to more money, and a better economy.
The fear here- and of course, most hate is driven by fear- is most likely the loss of Japan's culture. And let's face it- that would be quite tragic, since it has ages of history and wonderful culture.
I think the biggest way to help with all of these things would be to ensure visitors to Japan understand and accept their culture; so that the Japanese who dislike foreigners can learn they're not all arrogant or ignorant. Other than that- time. And yes- a well implimented human rights constitution.

...That ended up being a LOT longer than intended, and the original was made so long ago, I doubt anyone will read this. But I enjoyed writing it, so no loss.

I can't believe some of the comments here.

...

2008-11-25T22:52:00.000+09:00

I can't believe some of the comments here.

You either have Human Rights or you don't, and the word Human Rights speaks for itself.

Racist, sexist and prejudiced people, whatever their nationality or country of residence, will never like Human Rights because it is the end of their wrongly ways.

Speaking for myself I haven't been to japan accept...

2008-10-03T10:18:00.000+09:00

Speaking for myself I haven't been to japan accept for a holiday once (We had a guide because we didn't speak Japanese and he managed to get us into anywhere we wanted to go)

However I know firsthand how you can be made to feel like a foreigner in your own country

I'm an Australian living in sydney in a prodeminently chinese area and it was only a few years ago that the shops were forced to have english on their signs, their are still shops where there is an english and chinese sign outside but not only are all the signs on the shelves in chinese but the prices are in Chinese currency (apoligies for not knowing the name of the chinese dollar) they will accept the dollar but pretend to speak no english (I know this because I know some of the shop assistants and they told me so)I have also been refused service in some of the restaurants here

I con only imagine what it must be like in a foreign country

How can anyone be against a bill that protects hum...

2007-10-12T23:46:00.000+09:00

How can anyone be against a bill that protects human rigts. Making the case that people might expolit the bill doesn't change the fact that the bill needs to be in place. Especially to protect people from racial discrimination. This has been a perpetuating form of ingnorace that has really hampered society. Not just in Japan but everywhere. If people can't find places to live or get jobs because becaues of discrimination this is what leads to high crime rates. Any idiot should be able to make that connection. The government here in America figured it out a long time ago. I'm black and i've never been to japan but i plan on going someday. It pains me to think that a place i've always admired wouldn't welcome me because of my dark skin. I believe the human rights bill is desperately needed in japan. Not just to protect foreigners but the people who were born there. The Koreans that were born in japan are treated like outsiders in their homeland. THATS INSANE. And yes i believe thats there homeland. Where ever you were brought into this world is where your home is. You can't logically tell a person that they don't belong somewhere because their ancestors weren't born there. Especially when there ancestor didn't asked to be brought there. Most of the Koreans that are in japan were born form the forced laborers that were brought over during WW2. WHATS WRONG THIS WORLD?

First of all that comic was racist, sexist and jus...

2007-10-12T23:08:00.000+09:00

First of all that comic was racist, sexist and just plain ignorant. Someone made the case that the landlord may have had foreign residents before that caused trouble and left without paying the rent. Just because the guy had a few bad foreign residents doesn't mean its ok to label the entire foreign community as trouble makers. THATS IGNORANCE BEYOND MY COMPREHENSION. You can't label an entire group of people from one persons actions.

I think this kind of human rights law is good. I w...

2006-07-24T07:39:00.000+09:00

I think this kind of human rights law is good. I would love to go to Japan but reading this I am put off but might go anyway for a short while. Maybe this protect foreigner law is part of a shift probably instigated by larger corporate bodies to undo the insularity that Japan is famous for. I am all for it. As a born-Brit of African and Caribbean heritage who has lived in and been deported from Canada after twenty years nationalism means jack-squat to me. I am so for globalism I can't even begin to say. There's plenty like me too: mongrels whose home is the ground under their feet who could use a good law that prevents discrimination. The thing with allowing landlords and restaurants to refuse money based on some bigotry is that it devalues that money in the hand of the discriminated. It turns certain workers into slaves because the money they work for is deemed, in certain situations, not good enough to buy the services and goods they need or even want.

...i'm surprised the guy in the comic even made it...

2006-07-03T03:41:00.000+09:00

...i'm surprised the guy in the comic even made it to the landlord. it would be more realistic if the real estate agent were saying, "sorry, we don't rent to foreigners".

seen on a rental flyer/form once: 売春でも外人でもOK! (prostitutes and foreigners welcome! notice "prostitutes" is listed first...)

And a spelling correction - "there" in the third s...

2006-06-15T23:48:00.000+09:00

And a spelling correction - "there" in the third sentence should be "their". How I wish these comments offered a preview!

I don`t mean to imply that there will be a huge sh...

2006-06-15T23:46:00.000+09:00

I don`t mean to imply that there will be a huge shift in thinking.
I mean, basically, that I don`t have any faith that this will be implemented properly. Third parties will find a way to use this to there advantage. The fine doesn`t go to the person wronged. I can MORE than picture it being misused to raise money. I don`t trust the government enough to say that they will want to give up any money they can get. I don`t have enough faith in them to say that they will bother to look into someone who the Human Rights Committee has deemed guilty.
The bill has it`s heart in the right place, but I still say the implementation is wrong. There need to be other more fundamental changes before this really means anything. It`s like putting a bandage over a gaping wound. Sure, it may be harder to see, but it`s still there just below the surface. This bill doesn`t address the root of the problem, it just tries to pretty it up. Without true equality in the currently present laws, I don`t see it doing anything useful. I`m not really all that concerned about how this law will actually effect minorities - other than draw up contempt. At this point in time, there *are* laws that support and protect certain minorities. Unfortunately, this has prompted contempt. I don`t see how this larger, more expansive bill would be different. Regardless, I am more concerned with how this could be warped for use in 嫌がらせ - which is a concern most everyone around me shares. It`s not so much the minority aspect of it, but the very idea that you could get into trouble based on some arbitrary judgement. One party doesn`t have to be a racial minority - which is why I used the neighbor example. Even if you were cleared, you still have the stress hanging over your head.

And just for your information - I`m not an Eikaiwa "teacher", and have absolutely no plans to be one. I do teach, but not English nor in English.

To everyone who has never experienced any discrimi...

2006-06-15T20:34:00.000+09:00

To everyone who has never experienced any discrimination in Japan, try renting a place to live. No, not the crap gaijin houses or low-income places, I mean in a normal, middle or upper-middle class neighborhood. I've had places in Tokyo turn me away and say to my face, "sorry, no gaijin." And yes, I speak Japanese, and I am completely non-threatening (white, skinny, 26yo male).

Thanks for the response. Depending on what I'm tra...

2006-06-15T15:26:00.000+09:00

Thanks for the response. Depending on what I'm translating, who it's being aimed at, and why, I would of course vary the amount of transliteration to interpretation. In this instance, if the original writer was asking for an official English version, then I'm sure then it would also look considerably different, but in those circumstances much of the editorial judgement I would leave to somebody else.

Also it was never my intent to imply that all of Japan thinks like this, and on seeing that people were taking it that way I updated the original post to clarify. I just really wanted to show this off as an example of how poorly written propoganda can have the opposite effect, and leave my personal politics out of it - but then even a fairly neutral standpoint looks extreme to somebody with an opinion. I do agree that people taking advantage of the language gap etc. for personal gain (including much of the eikaiwa industry ;-) ) are a disgrace, and given all the negative press about foreign crime I'm certain that any such implementation would take into consideration that there are crooks on both sides. Things currently are so heavily weighted against minorities that the kind of 180° shift in attitude across all aspects of society you're anticipating seem very unrealistic to be honest. The precedent has already been set that if you're not a native speaker then you probably misheard - case dismissed, and I see no reason for this admittedly worrying trend not to continue.

I appreciate your respectful reply. I am also a tr...

2006-06-15T15:01:00.000+09:00

I appreciate your respectful reply. I am also a translator, and the translation I have done has been limited to mostly fiction - While your translation may serve it`s purposes here, I don`t believe that it would pass for publication.
My feelings that it is misleading mainly come from my own personal feelings toward it. I read your translation first, and was in disbelief that someone could write something like that. Then, I read the original, and received a totally different feeling from it. Not "Right" of course, but not the same shock and disgust your translation brought me.
I didn`t intend to directly insult your translation, which I realize I ended up doing. I have strong feelings about the bias in translations covering topics not generally agreed with. I still feel the author could not have possibly intended to make his "good" characters sound bad. While your interpretation may, in the end, be "correct" for your purposes - it still doesn`t reflect what the author actually wanted to say. That is where I believe it is misleading.

Another big point is that this doesn`t really reflect the views of the common Japanese. And yet, here, it is presented as such... To put something up looking like it is the way everyone thinks sort of seems like you`re taking a shot at Japanese in general. I`m sure you`re not, as you obviously live here, but does the casual viewer know that? Does the casual viewer who sees this up on another site know that? No. It just supports stereotypes of Japanese... Which is one of the big reasons foreigners use over here to justify screwing themselves with all the crap they do. (Not paying, pretending not to understand to get out of paying, shoplifting because they`re big and no one will check, etc.)

I believe that there needs to be something in place to bring equality to the law when foreigners are involved. This bill protects the underdog, raising him above a regular Japanese person. I sincerely believe that will only breed contempt. Even putting someone above their counterparts is still discrimination. The plan to implement "Human Rights Committee Members" is, in itself, a bit sketchy. The plan seems to be to accept volunteers, run them through a training course, and give them a badge. Essentially a volunteer force of civilians. Any bystander in the situation would be able to report the offense, prompting an investigation. That opens the door for a lot of abuse. You don`t like your neighbor? They said something that violated your rights! - Whether it is true or not. With a volunteer force checking these things out, there is a fair chance they won`t listen to both sides of the story. That is the MAIN complaint that is brought up about this bill. The comic just did a lousy job of conveying that part - although I`m certain it was covered in the actual book`s text. The bill covers every aspect of life, which means you could be out somewhere and make an "offensive" statement to a friend, be overheard, and then end up being investigated. There are really no limits in the bill - what is an offense is really up to the whims of the members. And knowing that the members will pretty much be volunteers who want to make a difference or who have personal feelings about the topic.... I don`t want to place my faith in that.

Oh, and I apologize for omitting the 「だけで」bit of text. I was looking at the original in another window and just forgot to type it in. 「一部だけで」is a way of saying "On 2ch". Not that it`s hidden - only that the mainstream media isn`t getting worked up about it.

Tamyu> As a translator, I will have to respectf...

2006-06-15T13:55:00.000+09:00

Tamyu> As a translator, I will have to respectfully disagree with a lot of your opinions. Direct literal translations of course are essential when dealing with technical documents or others that will be scrutinised based on their translations. Narratives such as this where the translation is aimed at people with a passing interest (or for entertainment) require a more interpretative translation in order to communicate the way it would have been written had it originally been in English. This is especially true with languages as different as Japanese and English, where in the former much more of the communication is in what isn't said. An editorial decision has to be made regarding the balance of precision and interpretation, and I believe I got the balance mostly right.

For example, you speak about the accents. The very first thing said 「よろしーく」contains a very obvious indicator that he is not a native speaker. Additionally, from the drawing style, it is immediately obvious to Japanese readers that the man is meant to be Chinese, as this is a very common caricature. A western audience not fully accustomed with this style is less likely to notice or draw the same conclusions from the caricature, so it was necessary to compensate by exaggerating the accent in a way that would be more obvious. The specifics are swings and roundabouts.

Then concerning the internet, it actually says 「一部だけで」. It also goes on later to specify that the mainstream media won't talk about it, and that you will need to search the net to find information. Simply saying "it's a hot topic among some people online" doesn't nearly communicate the original meaning that this is something you have to specifically look for in order to find (in other words, the definition of "hidden.")

Concerning "can't rent" and "won't rent" - the usage is different between languages, and I maintain 貸せません in this context more accurately translates to "won't rent" than "can't rent."

All in all, the translations are not aimed at students of foreign literature, and I stand by my editing choices. I don't think any of the things you've pointed out would qualify as horribly inaccurate or misleading as you suggested earlier, and the amount of people here agreeing with the original author based on my translation stand testament to this.

Now about whether or not the law is a good idea, I've already said enough on that topic, needless to say I do not agree with you - needless to say it is guaranteed by the constitution and demanded by a treaty that Japan voluntarily signed into a decade ago. Of course if you think that lawmakers should be able to overlook the constitution when it suits them then good for you, but you should probably tell the Legal Affairs Bureau this before a final decision is made on your citizenship application. ;-) And as for acting on feelings, I'm sure there are people who would like to break into my apartment, steal my bike, and cause me physical damage. I'm rather glad that the law is there to stop them acting on these, regardless of their feelings.

2006-06-15T13:31:00.000+09:00

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

I just wanted to correct an error in my last post ...

2006-06-14T23:49:00.000+09:00

I just wanted to correct an error in my last post - "Just because some law is there saying they act on their feelings" should be "Just because some law is there saying they can`t act on their feelings"

I apologize for not immediately posting more detai...

2006-06-14T19:49:00.000+09:00

I apologize for not immediately posting more details on what I feel is wrong with the translation. I am happy to do so now.

But, before I elaborate, I want to bring attention to translation in itself. Translation is accurately putting the authors words and intent into a different language. There is no room for the translator`s personal feelings about the topic. Even if the author is writing something in favor of something you HATE, when you translate that you need to retain the author`s emotions about the topic. Otherwise, it isn`t a translation, but merely an interpretation.
I think Sean put it pretty well - translated the way this is, it is pretty difficult to sympathize with the characters. Even when the English version is translated into Japanese - It doesn`t gather any support. The original author could not have intended that. What is the point of writing something in support of a cause that actually makes the cause look bad? It makes no sense.

My feelings are not related to whether the author is right or not - but whether you are accurately conveying what he intended.

And now, on to what I take issue with. I personally find it irritating that you have added strong accents and very poor grammar to the foreign characters. The original author *does not*. While it might not make a difference to you, it was the VERY FIRST thing that a non-Japanese speaker I showed this to found offensive. And yet, it`s hardly present in the original comic. The foreign characters have Japanese nearly equal to that of the Japanese characters. You overdid it.

And now on to specific examples.
On page 37 of the original: The original says 「いまネットなど一部騒がれてる」- Your translation says "hidden". Nowhere does he say it`s hidden. A correct translation would say "The (bill) that certain places online are getting worked up about" or "that is a hot topic with some people online". Nothing about it being hidden anywhere in there.

Page 38: 貸せません = "I can`t rent". You put "I won`t". Even "I don`t" would be more accurate in the situation. Sure, he may MEAN he refuses to rent to foreigners, but those aren`t his actual words.
The same page: （たぶんパソコンとかも）You translate that as "(most likely computers)". It means "(Possibly even computers)". Also, 公表する isn`t blacklisting - It`s just making details of the charges available to the public.

Page 39:
When the factory owner refuses her the job, he states a reason: 「だいたい使いものにならないから」, you neglect to include this. It *is* necessary, because when he fires her it is confirmed. 「女じゃ無理」could be put more accutately as "This isn`t a woman`s job".
Your "backtracking" is likely a correct interpretation, but he actually SAYS "Sorry, I was a bit too harsh". He says "Fine. I`ll hire you". You just make him sound bad by putting the "congratulations" in there.
「なんだよさぼってばかりじゃないか」= "I knew it. You`re always slacking off!" With your translation, she could have just been taking a break and he could have jumped to fire her because of her race. That`s what it looked like to me before I read the original.
The situation with the schoolgirl - "Yumi, you`re a girl. You should show a little more care when you sew."

And that`s just the start. You have made the author sound worse than he actually does when he talks about the "thought police"... etc.

I would go on, but I think I have made my point.
I do not agree with the situations that are happening in the comic - but I also agree that this sort of bill passing is NOT going to change things for the better. Instead of people simply not liking/accepting foreigners, there will be contempt for them. People will feel pressured to "pretend" they don`t think in a certain way. Their actual thoughts and feelings will not change - and in fact, I feel they will get worse. I think that something similar has happened in the US - in particular, Equal Opportunity. It`s a great idea on paper, but if people are rascist to begin with they will feel even more strongly when they believe that
they are being *forced* into doing something.
If I work at a company and have a good position, I want people to look at that and think that I must be doing a good job...Not that I must have gotten there through blackmailing my employer with this law.
If you want people to change, prove them wrong. Just because some law is there saying they act on their feelings, it doesn`t mean they will stop feeling that way.

Imagine the horror! All those "Japanese Only" bars...

2006-06-14T19:45:00.000+09:00

Imagine the horror! All those "Japanese Only" bars I saw last time I was there would have to let in *gasp* foreigners!! I'd like to see anyone try to get away with something like that over here in the US.

I would like to request once again that Tamyu poin...

2006-06-14T14:24:00.000+09:00

I would like to request once again that Tamyu point out the specific inaccuracies found in the translation (particularly the ones he/she feels are intentionally misleading), and provide more accurate alternatives. Without these, the comment becomes little more than a cheap shot aimed at eroding credibility.

Some good points.

Concerning the intricacie...

2006-06-14T10:42:00.000+09:00

Some good points.

Concerning the intricacies of implementation, I think that's what we pay taxes for. Seriously though, those kind of difficulties should not detract from the point that Japan needs laws protecting human rights. If you're from a country where you grew up with such law already in place then it's very easy to take it for granted, and indeed complain about some of the consequences of poor implementation and arbitrary enforcement. Furthermore we realise that you can't change people's attitudes overnight, so discrimination will continue to happen at a micro level. The thing is, the constitution demands that all people be treated fairly and with dignity, and the UN treaty outlawing discrimination that Japan signed into in the 90s likewise demands that Japan do all in its power at every level of government without delay to outlaw discriminative behaviour. By not doing this, the government is basically saying it's fine to discriminate. This bill to protect human rights is a very important step in the right direction.

For the record, my experience with bureaucracy here is that it's very thorough, often overly so. When I see the fearmongering going on in the comic, I'm more concerned it'll be the other way round - e.g. in the case of the landlord refusing tenancy to a foreigner it'll come down to Mr A's word against Mr B's, and as Mr B is (probably) not a native speaker he must have misunderstood what Mr A said. Case dismissed. This has happened before (albiet in private lawsuits as opposed to being as part of an established complaints procedure) and recently too.

Jonathan> You're absolutely right and I should have made it clearer. This is like the history book issue, in that it's a majority being judged by the actions of a minority (which sounds pretty familiar given the discussion). I don't know exactly who came up with this publication but it's clearly an extreme right wing view and shouldn't be taken as typical (though I couldn't tell you how typical this view is). That's why what's really interesting is not so much what they are saying as what they're not. "With this law, landlords can no longer turn down tenants on a superficial basis" - I read that to mean "under current law landlords can and do freely discriminate based on race and nationality, punishing entire ethnic groups over the hearsay actions of a few." It's basically describing the exact reasons why such laws are necessary. If I hadn't seen the source I'd call it a parody.

I think this needs at least some perspective. Whil...

2006-06-14T06:05:00.000+09:00

I think this needs at least some perspective. While I fully support the efforts of those who have exposed this obviously idiotic, racist bilge, the issue is not that it exists but whether its existence matters. In discovering this stuff, are we saying that it's really an indication of how most Japanese think? If I put my mind to it, I'm sure I could find stuff just as bad here in the UK. But I'd dismiss it for what it is: irrelevant junk. I wouldn't give it the credit of being influential in any way - which is, I'm afraid, what is happening on this blog.

The problem with human rights legislation is not m...

2006-06-14T05:05:00.000+09:00

The problem with human rights legislation is not merely that it can be badly implemented. The problem with it is that it is far more difficult to correct than other types of legislation when it goes wrong. When you've told the public that they have an absolute right to something merely be dint of being human, it is exceedingly difficult to try to change the terms of that right a few years later when it turns out all tits-up.

The best way to enforce particular types of behaviour (if you really think that banning behavior can work without being hopelessly counterproductive) is to pass a law saying what may not be done and have the police enforce that law. People commit a crime, you punish them. Simple. A right is a whole different thing: you have a law which says that people are absolutely entitled to receive certain things, regardless of whether anyone has committed any sort of crime against them. So, for instance, in Germany, the right to housing has led to laws forcing people with too many unused rooms in their houses to take in tenants -- it's not just forcing landlords not to discrimate, but forcing non-landlords to become landlords. See the problem? If you have a right to live in a comfortable house and there are too few houses to go around, then you can have your right infringed without anyone actually breaking any sort of law. But, having told people they have a right, the state can't then tell them that it's changed its mind, so the only course of action left is to create a new law and punish people for doing something that wasn't previously criminal behaviour.

And the problem with a human rights commission is that it is a bureaucracy, and all bureaucracies are self-perpetuating. Creating new laws for the police to enfoce is no big problem: there will always be various laws to enforce, so the police have no vested interest in keeping particular types of criminal active. But just think: if no human rights are being violated, everyone in the human rights commission is out of a job. So what human rights commissions do is make sure that human rights always are being violated. If people stop being racist, they redefine racism; if employers treat everyone fairly, they redefine what constitutes fairness. And that means that more and more normal behaviour is redefined by the state as being bad. And that creates one hell of a lot of resentment in society.

It's happened in other countries. It's a disaster. Don't do it.

This is a very interesting comic - thanks for post...

2006-06-14T03:27:00.000+09:00

This is a very interesting comic - thanks for posting it, Coal. Comics, being one of the last one-man shows around, continue to be a great platform for very personal expression. Its funny to see when that very personal expression is of some crackpot's xenophobia.

The comic subtly speaks to the institutionalized mental segregation that seems so prevalent in Japan. I think of older Hollywood movies where subtle sexism is ever-present, or the very casual racism in older novels, and how that seems like an interesting cultural indicator of how things were and how much things have changed. Obviously, sexism, racism and segregation still exist here in the U.S.; but it has been forced to hide its face a little more. It will be interesting to see how this legislation affects Japanese society in the years to come. I hope you are able to revisit this subject from time to time on your site, Coal.

i am an indian from singapore, and have spent a fe...

2006-06-13T21:41:00.000+09:00

i am an indian from singapore, and have spent a few years in japan, setting up a business, i have never experienced discrimination to levels some have posted, i have been invited into many japanese homes, to dine with them (this for an asian, shows respect and trust), never been stopped from entering any pubs or public baths/hot springs

one thing that was pointed out by a japanese friend, was the attitude some westerner had towards japanese women, they believe the typical stereotype of a japanese woman being easy and sex starved for the white man, i have seen with my own eyes, the amount of disrespect shown to them, never would they try the same thing on a woman of their own country. Compared to countries like australia and some places in Europe, i have been treated quite well in japan. thank you

The thing I find funny is that after everything I ...

2006-06-13T18:13:00.000+09:00

The thing I find funny is that after everything I have been through in Japan I am still here..... and even funnier I now make about twice the avarage salary man here..... LOL. It is funny that in a place where discrimination is so wide spread being white can also work in your favor. I know that if I was Japanese my opertunitys would be limtless but my salary would be half... right now I will take things the way they are....

Although the words "don't feed the troll" come to ...

2006-06-13T18:04:00.000+09:00

Although the words "don't feed the troll" come to mind, I can't resist. Japan doesn't want foreigners eh? As for me, the Minsiter for Justice PERSONALLY approved my citizenship application, so I arguably have MORE right to be here than your average native, whose only qualification is some kind of vague tokenistic genetic connection to somebody else who had a similar vague connection to somebody else recurring. Not really a solid basis for a civil society.

(Tongue firmly placed in cheek)