Comment by Turner

March 9, 2007 @ 12:53 am

This comment should be on Debito’s site as well

Very nice. You went much more in depth than I saw in the Yamato Damacy interview last year. I wish you guys hadn’t “scratched the needle” changing topics, as it were, because you were all getting a pretty good rapport going. Schedules, schedules…

The most compelling argument I keep hearing is: what happens to these children, who, despite their foreign appearance, are 100% Japanese? Honestly, despite the inevitability of an internationalized Japan, I just don’t see the government breaking this pattern of “nonacceptance of non-Japanese [institutionalism]” anytime in the near future. Call me a newbie in Japan, and maybe I’m missing something, but Debito’s been fighting the fight for years, and despite legal victories, have we seen any real changes in the mindset of the media or government?

On paper, in courts of law, or even in the constitution, I have confidence there will be progress (eventually). But with Japanese Only signs (and businesses that still refuse to remove them), publishers spreading “bad foreigners are devouring Japan!!”, and officials at the highest levels of government blind to certain inevitabilities - and the past, so it seems - I just don’t know… What are your thoughts?

Comment by Akoua Doffou

March 9, 2007 @ 5:01 am

This interview with Arudou Debito is excellent! I was very surprised with Debito’s voice tone. He didn’t sound like a stereotypical “activist”. I also partly agree with Turner above. Japan is a slow starter when it comes to internationalization. Even though Debito has won legal cases (Yunohana Onsen), the media remains firmly planted to the mindset that “All foreigners are bad”.

The Gaijin Hanzai ura fairu magazine isn’t helping the image of foreigners in Japan at all. Ah, it’s hard to be a foreigner in Japan, isn’t it?

Comment by Alex

March 9, 2007 @ 5:23 am

I’ve seen a good deal of change on this from co-workers and family members. Even just four years ago, most people I was meeting for the first time thought if you looked “non-Japanese” then you weren’t Japanese.

I think both society and the government institution are both slow on this because they’re isn’t enough voice asking for change. Not to take away from Debito’s work because he does miracles. But yes, flashing a Japanese passport and so forth will really impress someone if you look like a gaijin, and thats the problem. They shouldn’t be impressed, it should just be part of the norm. But sadly its not yet…

But yes I do think its changing…

Comment by Ken Y-N

March 9, 2007 @ 10:01 am

Interesting show! A few things, however, cropped up:

One of the points raised was that gaijin/Japanese couples with children leave the country to avoid problems of bullying at school, etc. Is there really a threat, or is it just the fear that makes people leave? Listening to stories of people who have actually sent their kids through school, it doesn’t seem like a major problem at all, no more (and perhaps even a little less) than “full” Japanese kids have to go through.

Another point about kids’ nationalities - all (I’m sure there’s exceptions, though!) half kids are both Japanese and foreign country nationals until they reach the age of 20 and have to choose one or the other.

Finally, talking about the most foreigner-friendly political party - I thought it was Komeito, as they wanted to give voting rights to Zainichi at local elections, for instance. That’s an idea for a future podcast, perhaps, looking at the gaijin-friendliness of the manifestos!

Oh, and although you let some swearing past your censor, I wish you’d bleeped out that pronounciation of kokumin! Arghh my ears!

Comment by DeOrio

March 9, 2007 @ 2:59 pm

Ken,
As for the first point, I gather it’s a fear, primarily. It does seem, anecdotally, that couples with a Western parent seem to leave, so that makes the group self-selecting and makes it hard to say what the situation of “half” children is. I haven’t seen a methodical study of the subject and have heard stories going both ways. On the whole, though, I agree with you - it does seem that most kids don’t have a problem. I wonder if they’re accepted as “normal” or “Japanese,” though.

Second, you’re right; unless, of course, as in Debito’s case, both parents are Japanese, even if one looks foreign.

You’re right about Komeito, too. I’m just biased against them because they’re allied with SG, who runs a bento shop near the building where I work, which consistently burns fried stuff. (Just kidding about the bias.)
In this particular case, there was a bit of oversimplification, narrowing it down to two parties. Komeito is good, but is not going to hold power except in a coalition any time soon.

Finally, the swearing. He was naked when he said it, too. Just be thankful we’re in radio.

Comment by Ken

March 9, 2007 @ 3:22 pm

Having any political party be aligned with a religion pretty much crosses it of my list, but that’s a personal thing.

There are a lot of issues here to cover. Ken Y-N: I think you’re right that fear drives many away; but what’s the difference, really? Whether it takes my kid getting beaten OR it takes my fear of my kid getting beaten, either way the brain drain is contributed to. It doesn’t help Japan that there are (and there legitimately are) many, many couples who leave the country out of fear for their children’s health and the quality of the education that they will receive. Whether or not those fears are justified (and I think it’s a case-by-case situation, and usually a matter of degree) hardly matters, because the results are real.

Comment by Turner

March 9, 2007 @ 11:07 pm

I haven’t talked to any parents of half-Japanese half-foreign (or foreign looking, in the case of a naturalized parent) children since I arrived, but I’d really like to have some firsthand knowledge of what school is like for them. Positive or negative, has anyone heard anything?

Comment by Adamu

March 10, 2007 @ 12:34 am

I couldn’t get through the whole thing, but the most interesting parts for me were Debito’s very even-handed take on Japan’s politics, such as the need to unite the nation under patriotic banners. I sometimes wish he’d talk more about issues besides his activism. He’s got very interesting things to say about things like Japanese elections and everyday life on his website (like this great essay on Muneo Suzuki’s downfall), but I don’t hear much on that front lately, maybe because he’s grown so accustomed to life here that stuff like a local election in Sapporo and his kid’s sports festival aren’t worth commenting on anymore?

I was going to comment that you guys didn’t talk about how it might be dangerous for commentators on Japan to spend too much time debating with other foreigners (apologies if you did talk about that in the last 20 minutes), but then I remembered that Debito *is* Japanese.

Comment by Ken Worsley

March 10, 2007 @ 1:59 am

Adam…I agree. I really liked hearing what he had to say in regards to Japanese politics and other issues, since they all affect us.

I made the same mistake, during the show, referring to the “4 Americans in the room.”

When you get a chance, check out the rest. I know 1:05 is taxing for an audio file. I expect to see a lot of people grab it and listen to part, then a bit more. There are still some parts I’d like to review. The last 20 mins are worth your time, I promise.

Comment by Alex

March 10, 2007 @ 3:21 am

I am very excited that TPR had an opportunity to speak with Debito. I agree Ken I think the last half our is quite fascinating, perhaps the most fascinating of the entire interview.

I am not sure if this is the place to ask but if TPR listeners had an opportunity to pick any one person to have interviewed I would be curious to know who would they like to hear from and why?

Comment by DeOrio

March 10, 2007 @ 12:02 pm

Good question, Alex. You mean other than Ken and me, right?

Comment by Alex Pappas

March 10, 2007 @ 1:05 pm

Well actually would be interesting to find out what you guys think too on this. Anyone on your wish list of possible interviewees ?

Comment by DeOrio

March 10, 2007 @ 1:40 pm

1. Yasuhisa Shiozaki
2. Bunmei Ibuki
3. Doudou Diene
4. Mike Honda
5. John W. Dower
6. Jun Okumura
7. Ian Buruma
Just off the top of my head.

Comment by claytonian

March 10, 2007 @ 6:13 pm

Excellent to hear these things guys.

BTW, I’m an eagle scout too ha ha

Comment by Turner

March 10, 2007 @ 9:01 pm

Yeah, me too. Wow, how many Japan bloggers are eagle scouts? Sept 10, 2000 here.

Comment by Garrett

March 10, 2007 @ 11:04 pm

Summer 1995, I think it was, for me.

Comment by Ken Y-N

March 12, 2007 @ 8:23 am

Disclosure: I am not an Eagle Scout.

But anyway, I couldn’t think of anywhere else to post this, but watching Bakusho Mondai’s If I were Prime Minister (one of my favourite telly programs) on Friday, they were debating the proposition of making “Ladies Day” discounts illegal, in the interests of equality.

One of the people in the “against” side, an ex-minister, I think, but active politician, said that Ladies Day was a purely economic activity by businesses, which the government had no business getting involved in. Afterwards I thought that one could extend that to mean that she was also against making “Japanese Only” illegal.

If anyone videoed it or uploaded it to YouTube, etc, you could watch it and find out who exactly said that.

Comment by DeOrio

March 12, 2007 @ 2:03 pm

Thanks, Ken.
I’d say Ladies’ Day at a department store is a different endeavor from Japanese Only, but I’ll take a look at the show.

What do you think?

Comment by Ken

March 12, 2007 @ 2:13 pm

Ken Y-N:

I suppose you could structure and make the same argument, or broaden the conclusion to include both.

It’s a pretty bankrupt argument, since it draws no lines. People who argue such things are frequently confronted with cases like, “So the government shouldn’t interfere with business? Fine, I’ll open my own cannibal restaurant.” And they come back and say, “Come on, that’s just crazy, it’s within reason.”

But we don’t agree on what ‘within reason’ means.

I do think there is a fundamental difference between ‘ladies night’ or ’senior citizen’s’ discounts and barring all non-Japanese from an establishment. I can’t clearly say what I think that difference is right now, so perhaps it’s more of a gut feeling.

As far as an ex-minister saying that the government should stay out of business: I applaud the sentiment but I find that confusing given the level of government interference in business in Japan.

By the way, Ken, I’m working up a solution to the, “I couldn’t find anywhere else to post this” problem that many of us have…

Comment by DeOrio

March 12, 2007 @ 2:55 pm

The difference is simple: “Japanese Only” is exclusionary, keeping entire groups out on a superficial basis.
“Ladies’ Day” is not usually an event that keeps men out, but rather gives a discount to a group that normally has less money or is more likely to be on a fixed income. Ladies’ Day is not exclusionary, really.

Comment by Ken Y-N

March 12, 2007 @ 4:01 pm

Ken, I thought about that, but there are already laws against cannibalism, and health & safety regulations stop you poisoning your guests, etc. Doesn’t the gov use the same excuse to justify not banning smoking in more places, or making other laws with no penalties for offenders.

Deorio, at that Otaru Onsen there was a gaijin pool at twice the price round the back, was there not? My tired eyes can’t cope with Debito’s site this afternoon! BTW, Movix Rokko has a Men’s Day too, same discount, same frequency.

Ken, looking forward to your plan, but please ensure you keep the quality up!

Comment by Ken Worsley

March 12, 2007 @ 7:06 pm

Ken Y-N:

Right, but what are laws other than cases of government intervention?

Comment by DeOrio

March 12, 2007 @ 7:51 pm

I think the central issue is whether or not men are barred from shopping in a store or going to a theater. There could be an argument for things such as women-only cars on trains or barring men from a women’s dressing room because it would, presumably, be easy to show potential problems of not having such rules.

I think it was a different onsen from the one that was intransigent that had the separate bath, but in order for separating people on the basis of nationality, a proprietor, in my view, would have to show that there a real and likely danger to “Japanese”-looking Japanese citizens in being exposed to foreigners or non-”Japanese”-looking Japanese.

We’d also be getting into a Jim Crow-like separate-but-equal situation, which is inherently untenable.

To strike down ladies’ days on grounds of equality in pricing would require striking down senior citizens’ discounts, student discounts, and all other targeted pricing, such as JR’s unlimited train passes available only to those who are neither Japanese nationals nor reside in Japan.

I know of neither statute nor precedent that would support such a decision, which would mean there would need to be either legislative action or the emergence of some specific injustice to men brought about by ladies’ being able to pay a little less for movie tickets on Wednesdays. After all, the barring of such a practice would mean that women had to pay more on such days, not that me would suddenly get a discount.

I wonder if the men who complain about such practices are actively pushing for the equalization of salaries and employment opportunities for women.

Comment by Alex

March 13, 2007 @ 12:20 am

Curiously enough I often feel slightly unsure what to do with respect to social etiquette when I’m taking a bus in Japan. Particularly when I see a 40 something year old woman standing I instinctively offer my seat. But actually more time then not they say ‘Ah iie. Daizobu desu. Arigatou.’ It’s only the elderly women who seem to accept the offer.

I can’t tell in situations as those if its just women being polite or if they feel as though ‘First come first serve, everyone is the same’ kind of attitude.

But if we want to look at equality as a broader issue, such as no-foreigners or same wage in the work place, Japan is easily one of the most openly discriminatory nations. My problem in arguing this fact is that I have never met a Japanese female who complained about discrimination. I have as mentioned in previous posts never felt or told to go away (with except at Yasukuni Shrine by the guitar playing extremest).

So although I know its there its not something I can argue with because it always seems to elude me.

Comment by Don

March 13, 2007 @ 10:17 am

Enjoyed the interview, thanks very much. My request for your next victim: “Aceface”, commenter extraordinaire on various Japan-related blogs.

Comment by DeOrio

March 13, 2007 @ 12:57 pm

You’re most welcome, Don.
Aceface, huh? I’ve come across him on Mutant Frog, I believe, but don’t really know anything about him. I’ll hold off on that at least until he starts commenting here - I’m vain like that.

Comment by Robert

March 14, 2007 @ 1:59 pm

Debito is a traitor who married a Japanese woman, and now wants the results of his traitor activity, his children, to be accepted as legitimate Japanese. A very lame argument from a very lame man.

Comment by ken

March 14, 2007 @ 2:10 pm

A traitor! That’s a serious accusation, given the definition of the term and potential punishment for such a crime:

trai·tor (trā’tər)
n. One who betrays one’s country, a cause, or a trust, especially one who commits treason.

I was wondering what evidence you would bring to a court of law or court martial in support of these allegations of treason?

Comment by DeOrio

March 14, 2007 @ 4:35 pm

Robert, if you want to toss around witless words, make baseless accusations, or start a flame war, go elsewhere.
We appreciate any and all comments from people who at least make an attempt to know what they’re talking about. Random attacks are the kind of thing you need not make public.

Comment by Ken Worsley

March 14, 2007 @ 4:40 pm

Well, DeOrio, he’s posting from Cambridge, Massachusetts, so it’s probably some clown who knows me trying to pull a funny…

…and failing.

Comment by JT

March 15, 2007 @ 4:27 am

“We appreciate any and all comments from people who at least make an attempt to know what they’re talking about.”

I’ve been listening since you all started up, and while I welcome the insight into a topic that I would otherwise know nothing about, it is only after your most recent effort that I feel justified in chiming in.

The topic of MI-6 agent 007, aka James Bond, came up, and while I’m willing to forgive the shameful amount of time it took to correctly identify “You Only Live Twice” as the one where 007 is given plastic surgery to look Japanese, I can’t ignore the clearly erroneous statement that “all Bond movies are the same.”

I don’t know exactly who said it, but if your podcast is to maintain even a veneer of credibility, I suggest at least correction or better yet, a full retraction and apology. If indeed it was meant to be ironic (as of course the Connery films are immeasurably better than any of those that followed, a fact well known to even a casual Bond fan), a clarification is in order for the sarcasm-challenged among us.

Comment by ken

March 15, 2007 @ 5:18 am

I would think the clarification would depend on whether we’re talking about a broad or narrow definition of ’same.’

Comment by DeOrio

March 15, 2007 @ 11:49 am

In the interests of bolstering my own ego, I’d like to point out that it was yours truly who correctly and, I might add, with no more hesitation than it took to interrupt, identified You Only Live Twice even though my esteemed colleagues seemed to doubt me. I then followed that, dear JT, with a rather good (if I do say so myself) imitation of Connery’s “shhumimashhhen.”

Ken, we just can’t say they’re the “same,” in a narrow sense, can we? Perhaps we should reevaluate that statement.
JT, you’re not, by any chance, running for Congress, are you?

Comment by Arudou Debito

March 26, 2007 @ 7:54 pm

Hi TPR, listeners, and bloggers. Arudou Debito here. Thanks for a nice time. One correction to my quotes.

I attributed “Can’t get hanged for what you don’t say” to Warren G. Harding. I stand corrected. It was probably “Silent Cal” Calvin Coolidge–another of those presidents whose legacy is long lost to time.

Anyway, I can’t find the exact quote (I have the feeling I read it in some place like The Economist), but a Google search did not avail. Anyway, similar quotes:

I have never been hurt by anything I didn’t say.
Calvin Coolidge
Source:http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Calvin_Coolidge/

If you don’t say anything, you won’t be called on to repeat it.
Calvin Coolidge
Source:http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/c/calvin_coolidge.html

I’m sure this is overkill, but an attempt at setting the record straight, FWIW. Sorry. Debito in Sapporo

Comment by ken

March 26, 2007 @ 8:31 pm

Debito, thanks for the update. I’m sure someone will be calling for a retraction and apology…

Comment by Adam Richards

March 26, 2007 @ 9:20 pm

There’s no mention of Coolidge, but presidential history buffs might like this look at the “10 horniest presidents.” JFK: “I’m never through with a girl until I’ve had her three ways.”

LBJ:
The Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos was once informed by his wife, Imelda, that she was being groped by LBJ on the White House dance floor. Marcos replied, “Ignore it, Meldy. It’s in a good cause.”

And many more

Comment by John S

March 26, 2007 @ 9:54 pm

I would say, given JT’s complaints about being unable to name the Bond film, as well as the surfacing of this misattribution of a quote to Warren G Harding, that a full retraction of the piece and apology would be in order. I have repeatedly called for such measures with regard to Seijigiri releases, yet have not seen any action taken. At the least, I think it would be appropriate to forgo a few months of salary.

Comment by DeOrio

March 27, 2007 @ 1:19 am

John, you’ll be pleased to know that Ken has taken a ten percent pay cut, the maximum disciplinary cut we can give him, and I have refunded all of my salary and benefits. My stock options all went to the government fund to pay reparations to Comfort Women.

Comment by ken

March 27, 2007 @ 1:39 am

It’s not a government fund. I think you just made things worse. He’s going to demand another apology…

Comment by John S

March 27, 2007 @ 5:09 pm

DeOrio,

‘government fund’? Once again I find it necessary to call for a retraction and apology. This time I will limit it to comment #55090, though the demand for a retration of the entire piece and an apology, as stated in comment #54990, stands.

Comment by DeOrio

March 28, 2007 @ 2:53 pm

That there is no government fund was the joke, John. Just like Ken’s nonexistent salary being cut was a joke.
Yours, my friend, is getting a little stale.