qwertyytrewq Wrote:Off-topic but I am interested in how other Asian countries like China and Korea treat sexuality. For example, Japan has a porn industry. China and as far as I know, Korea, does not.

Korea is a pretty rich country now, why no porn industry?

Pornography is illegal in China - possession of porn gets you 3 years in prison! There was a news case a few years back where a guy was arrested and charged for just watching porn online :0

Now for Korea, and other smaller Asian countries: Taiwan has a porn industry (I've seen it on sale), but there's basically no market for it as the adult shops are all stocked with J-AV. Just as the American adult industry has reduced all other Western countries porn output to small fetish markets, Japan has flooded the markets in Asia, and made all other Asian AV pretty much redundant.

qwertyytrewq Wrote:I was thinking that, compared to their Japanese neighbours, Korean society in the past was a bit more receptive of Christianity and because of this, certain parts of Christian values may have filtered down into Korea. In other words, when it comes to sex, Korea is more conservative than usual when it comes to sex, or at least the production of porn.

Not a factor; it's all about money. If any media company could make millions making Korean porn movies they would be doing it, but they can't; it's just not financially viable trying to compete with Japan.

qwertyytrewq Wrote:You mentioned that American porn has flooded other Western countries. Even so, those Western countries have their own homegrown porn to be proud of.

This is inconspicuously absent or at least, a lot harder to find, in the Asian ones.

Searching for "korean porn" on google gets over a million hits (and the names of a few Korean pornstars). Searching in Korean would presumably get more. I think you're not looking hard enough

qwertyytrewq Wrote:I assume you are using a negative tone here. In that case, would you consider this morally wrong or objectively wrong?

If the former, then consider this:

The market has spoken. The sellers (AKB48) and the buyers (middle-aged males) have a mutually beneficial financial relationship that hurts neither themselves nor third-parties. Who are we, you and I, to break this relationship?

If the latter, then please explain why.

My main point in that statement was not really about whether it is right or wrong for the producer to be doing this to the girls, or to be manipulating the situation in this way. Really I was just commenting on what was said earlier about AKB's fan base being mostly teens. Which I won't deny, may be the case, but simply that the thing that keeps the gears lubricated and running are middle age men fawning over teenage girls.

I wouldn't say its a relationship devoid of negative problems though Its been said that the girls operate under pretty stringent work conditions and that the fans (middle aged men) have inflicted a fair amount of mental distress on some of the girls. This on top of the fact that most of the girls make pennies compared to the profits being racked in by the producers.

As to whether I think its right or wrong though. I don't think any legislation is needed to outlaw AKB groups. If I believed that I'd be a hypocrite. That however doesn't stop me from being disgusted by the actions of the producers; which i see as exploitative and abusive.

Quote:Off-topic but I am interested in how other Asian countries like China and Korea treat sexuality. For example, Japan has a porn industry. China and as far as I know, Korea, does not.

Korea is a pretty rich country now, why no porn industry?

Korea is a catholic nation. Whether or not this really actually has much affect on the policies enacted by the government or not I don't know. I'm playing the religious background card here though. Its because of the religious background that Japan is more open to sex I think. Shinto-ism's creation story is ***** porno novel...just saying. (If you don't know what I"m talking about then I encourage you to go and look at some translations from Kojiki. I vaguely recall there being lines about how feces and urine became islands or something. Bodily fluids played a big role in the creation myth.
My understanding is that just isn't much in Shinto telling Japanese people to "not have sex promiscuously."

Quote:Even just a completely innocent photo of a bare chair, Americans would consider it porn because they are convinced, someone, anyone, out there, is masturbating to it.

And this is where is starts to stray into "thought crime" and people start going to jail because they view a pic of something as a little girl or a little boy.

[Zgarbas]

Tzadeck Wrote:Sexism, on the other hand, is beliefs, attitudes and institutions that promote an unfair advantage of one sex over the other economically, socially, or politically. It's completely possible that men could place more value on physical attractiveness, and if that were true admitting it would not be sexist. Even if it's not true, saying it is true would be a mistake, but it would not actually be sexist if it were not promoting economic, social, or political inequality.

Sexism is about many things. It can be about gender roles. It can be about unfair advantages. It can be about repressing one's growth in order for that person to develop in a more stereotypical manner. It is also about being demeaning to a large percentage of the population(roughly 49%, or 51% depending on which gender you're talking about). By enforcing generalizations and stereotypes then a person growing up in such a society will feel forced to mark these assumptions as true. Not saying that there aren't bigger problems that exist out there, but why ignore the things which subconsciously affect society? The generalizations may be made as a general description, but their existence is also an enforcement of that particular belief. When someone tries to break the standard they are instantly shunned.

For anecdotal evidence, have you never met a man who was made fun of by his peers for not getting laid? I've met plenty of guys who were made fun of because they wouldn't cheat on their girlfriends, and I consider that the generalization that "that's what guys do" is the cause of this.

Quote:Such as?

Copping a feel. Profiting of the fact that people that age are naive and easy to manipulate into getting underage sex. Getting her naked in his van, taking pictures and posting them online? I don't know, whatever it is that pedos do.

Quote:Man's sole or main requirement when it comes to the opposite sex is looks.

Then how come ugly people get laid?

FFS. Seriously?

Quote:tongue.

I like the bit where you cut out the part where I said that there are men who also do that but everyone ignores them. Very Lord of the Flies.

And yes, many girls are raised being told that they should get nice, rich husbands, and then act accordingly. Does that shock you?

Quote:Sounds like a generalisation to me which is supposed to be my job. It this 25 year old Lego-playing guy was in a bar or a nightclub and the average woman there asked what's his hobby and he said legos, "young-minded and cool" entering the mind of the woman sounds like an unlikely conclusion.

See, there are multiple kinds of generalizations. Saying all monkeys are mammals is one type. Saying 49% of the population think with their penises is another.

In my case, the generalization was based on the fact that I, myself, was raised in a society. And I assume you were too. I got bullied for being fat. The fat boy in my class got bullied for studying a lot. I've never met a girl that was bullied for spending most of her time studying, but most boys I knew got called bad names if they did so. However, if a girl would get straight As she was "studious" and if a boy did he was "smart". Because obviously boys are naturally more talented and can occupy their time with whatever they want, whereas girls have to work for it.

And yes, I've met many people well past their 20s who continued having childish hobbies and no one batted an eyelash (unless it was part of some shunned subculture like miniature collection, but that's another thing). Out of these I think only a couple were women, and the only reason they could pull it off was that they had to bring up their education or work whenever the subject came up.

I wish I could say this ends in elementary, but it's like that in Uni too. It was like that at most jobs I've worked as well. Hell, it's like that with most people I've ever met. So yeah, I think it's pretty firm to say so. And hell, this is just the first world Western countries, let's not even bring up the other continents.

Quote:Sounds like an argument to lower the age of consent for females (females can have sex earlier) while the age of consent for males should be raised (males have to wait for the maturity to catch up).

By the way, rightly or wrongly, you're generalising an entire population of 16 year old girls based on your own experiences (anecdotal "evidence"). Okay, you didn't say it but you're implying it and using this personal experience to support your previous argument.

Unfortunately since there is no way to objectively measure maturity one has to uses anecdotal evidence. However, it is also something that makes sense from a sociological point of view. Feminism has only been recently enforced and women are raising their children to act their best. Even the ones who still keep le old principles in mind still teach their girls to act as if they aren't so as not to stand out. Women who had not been able to pursue higher education or get proper jobs get mad at their girls if THEY don't pursue them, because they have the opportunity. It's understandable.

Also, as a negative side effect of feminism a social stigma is put upon those who fail to show that they are worth the fuss. No one wants to be that kid that people can point at and say HA HA. Why do you think there are more women pursuing higher education than men? (there was a statistic for that somewhere). It's not because they are necessarily smarter, it's because the mass conscious declares that they should prove their worth. Since men have never had this issue there is no reason to push boys harder, and they are allowed to develop as they wish.

Oh, and I'd never encourage different ages of consent! I just encourage a society in which both genders are equal =)

Quote:That's a strawman. I never said it was the only thing pushing abstinence. Just a major part of it.

+

Anyway, when it comes to generalisations, I stick to my claim that the main thing driving abstinence as a form of sex/birth control is Christianity/Catholicism because they have the most to gain from it.

Just follow the money.

Abstinence is pushed by many things, regardless of Christianity's involvement. Most religions enforce it, most conservative societies enforce it, most parents who don't like a penis in their daughter enforce it. And hey, abstinence really is the best way to prevent an STD or unwanted pregnancy. Better sex ed is needed EVERYWHERE, not just in Christian countries.

And hey, my parents grew up in a religious-less country where abstinence was not only not encouraged, but actively punished. All forms of protection were forbidden and abortions were also forbidden. What did people do? Have sex anyway and abort with the old coat hanger. It's because people really suck when it comes to sex.

Quote:I'm insulting the guy's friends as well as the 130 million people (and the rest of the world for that matter) who choose to have an anti-education stance and deride them as "academic elitists and know-it-alls" as if being well informed is a negative thing.

I like how you're against anti-education whilst stating that all men only choose women for their looks. Very "academic elitist".

Quote:If a non-half-assed argument is what you want, I'll have you know that the insertion of sarcasm into one is not conducive to one.

Something about "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit" but my usage may be incorrect due to the original context in which the quote was taken from.

Who said I was trying to be witty?

And hey, I'm not the one that just picks up the most common hatreds on the Internet and advocates them whenever he gets a chance. Because seriously, inserting "Americans" and "Christians" whenever you're facing something that you disapprove of won't get you any points.

qwertyytrewq Wrote:Anecdotal evidence aside, one thing worth mentioning is that males place a much much higher importance on physical appearances (often the sole requirement) than females (who have multiple requirements). This of course, varies from individual to individual but as a general trend, can be considered true.

Ignoring teenagers for a second, this is why older-man/younger-female relationships are so much more common than older-female/younger-male relationships.

It's not just that males like younger females, younger females also like older men!

My theory is that older men, given a choice, PREFER younger females over an older one. I'm not a female and I'm not about to ask my female friends right now about this controversial topic, so at the moment, I cannot explain the younger female's views.

Younger females aren't generally attracted to men 20 or more years older than themselves, no matter how much money they have or whatever other reason women choose their partners based on.

The age range widens as women get older, the same as it does for men, but you rarely see 20 year old women thinking anything other than "ew gross" when some 40 year old is staring at their breasts. They might be attracted to an 18 - 28 year old, as opposed to a man of 20, who might be attracted to 16-22 in women. A 30 year old woman might like 27-40 age range.

Sorry, but most middle aged men who fawn over young girls are perceived by those girls as pretty disgusting. So the fact that society teaches older men to perceive 14 year olds as the ideal is a bit ridiculous, i think. Even if they do, in some miraculous fit of drunkenness on the girl's part, manage to sleep with them, the girl most likely thinks he's decrepit and nasty, and is laughing at them behind their back the next day.

If you look at the average gap in ages in marriages, you see a very different pattern in most places. The vast majority of men end up marrying and having kids with women who are only slightly younger than them (in societies where women get to choose who they marry).

Look, it's one thing to say "this is how society is", and your stereotype is true of many men, perhaps the majority in Western societies atm. But i've also met many, many men who it is totally untrue of, and who wouldn't dream of leering at 14 year olds.

Often, you hear lots of people, at this point bring genetics into it... "men will be men", and they're attracted to the youngest girl possible because she's most fertile. But that's actually not true... fertility peaks at the 25-29 year old range. Certainly girls under 16 are less fertile than those in their 20s.

Also, if you look at any complex animal society, you see numerous strategies for finding a good mate, not just "go for the prettiest" amongst males. Yes, it's the way that society expects men to be atm. But it's not the way it always has been, or always will be, and as i explained above, it doesn't actually work for men (not to mention the fact that it's going to totally turn off the women who you do actually have a chance with), so i see little reason to support it.

Zgarbas Wrote:

Quote:Man's sole or main requirement when it comes to the opposite sex is looks.

Then how come ugly people get laid?

FFS. Seriously?

this is a good point. I'm nowhere near beautiful, but i've never had a problem with finding men to sleep with when i feel like it. I definately have much much less difficulty than an ugly, or even slightly below average looking man. So, go figure....

(all the rest of Zgarbas' points are great too imo)

IceCream Wrote:Often, you hear lots of people, at this point bring genetics into it... "men will be men", and they're attracted to the youngest girl possible because she's most fertile. But that's actually not true...

...and of course even if it were true it wouldn't be some kind of "get out of shitty behaviour free" card. Part of civilisation is figuring out which of the tendencies inherited from our plains ape ancestors aren't actually a good thing and should be culturally/legally/socially suppressed, IMHO.

I don't remember these types of discussions doing the rounds when Britney spears first appeared at 17 in a school uniform asking to be "hit one more time." I can remember people thinking it was sexualised yes, a bit on the naughty side even, but no guy was ever called a peado for looking twice and or buying tickets to see her shows.
It should be noted that the AKB girls mostly seen in public, with the exception of 2 are over 18, the girls in the singles and promotions with the exception of Watanabe Mayu (17), and SKE's Matsui Jurina(14) (who is a whole other chapter on this problem..) are 18+ . Yes there are younger members but they tend to be kept in the theatre anyway.

There is a great deal of finger pointing goes on, when no one stops to look at their own culture and think "hang on, ours is just as royally bucked up as theirs. "

vix86 Wrote:Korea is a catholic nation.

Korea is most definitely NOT a Catholic nation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_South_Korea
Only 10% of the population professes to be Catholic. While it is the fastest-growing faith in the country, there are less Christians (Catholics and Protestants combined) than Buddhists, and there are less Buddhists than people who claim no faith at all (46.5%).

Openness to sex in Eastern societies does not have anything to do with religion: take India, for example, which is an extremely socially conservative country that is largely Hindu and also gave us the Kama Sutra. Shunning discussion of sex isn't about religion - it's about culture.

And I may be going out on a limb here, but isn't it logical to extrapolate that if something is not talked about, it is therefore stigmatized? Just because lots of people DO it doesn't mean it's not stigmatized. Stigma doesn't have anything to do with behaviors - it's about attitudes.

I think the word you're looking for is "taboo".

harusame Wrote:

vix86 Wrote:Korea is a catholic nation.

Korea is most definitely NOT a Catholic nation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_South_Korea
Only 10% of the population professes to be Catholic. While it is the fastest-growing faith in the country, there are less Christians (Catholics and Protestants combined) than Buddhists, and there are less Buddhists than people who claim no faith at all (46.5%).

18.3% (Protestantism) + 10.9% (Catholicism) = 29.2% > 22.8% (Buddhism).
In fact I've heard that some Buddhist organizations report institutionalized discrimination against Buddhists and preferential treatment of Christians by the current administration. But yeah, Korea is still not quite a Christian nation, let alone a Catholic one. vix86, maybe you were thinking of the Philippines?

Zgarbas Wrote:Sexism is about many things. It can be about gender roles. It can be about unfair advantages. It can be about repressing one's growth in order for that person to develop in a more stereotypical manner. It is also about being demeaning to a large percentage of the population(roughly 49%, or 51% depending on which gender you're talking about). By enforcing generalizations and stereotypes then a person growing up in such a society will feel forced to mark these assumptions as true. Not saying that there aren't bigger problems that exist out there, but why ignore the things which subconsciously affect society? The generalizations may be made as a general description, but their existence is also an enforcement of that particular belief. When someone tries to break the standard they are instantly shunned.

For anecdotal evidence, have you never met a man who was made fun of by his peers for not getting laid? I've met plenty of guys who were made fun of because they wouldn't cheat on their girlfriends, and I consider that the generalization that "that's what guys do" is the cause of this.

Feminism concerns itself with gender roles because certain gender roles are fundamentally linked to economic, social, and political equality. For example, gender roles about the role of women in professional life, in the sphere of the home, in decision making, or in child rearing. If you said, for example, "Women are naturally concerned with childbirth and are drawn to have and raise children, so that is their proper role," it would be expressing a sexist gender role. It's sexist because it is limiting the sphere of what a woman can do to just one thing, and saying that thing is more important than a career, or other social or political roles a woman could be involved in. It's ignoring a whole range of possibilities for a woman besides just raising children.

One important difference in the example that qwertyytrewq said is that it's not so closely related to a woman's standing in society. You could argue that in a roundabout way it could influence the standing of women in society (For example, that if a woman is highly valued based on her looks, she will not be motivated to improve her standing in professional or political spheres), but only in a round-about way that I'm not very interested in. People have a tendency to be short-sighted in considering that kind of thing.

Another thing to note is that it's okay for there to be biological tendencies for the sexes, and more so than pretending that they don't exist what's really important is that we are accepting of variations from these tendencies. We can also note that a specific culture can vary from these tendencies in a big way, and we can speculate whether or not something is a biological tendancy or just a cultural difference.

You also say this: "By enforcing generalizations and stereotypes then a person growing up in such a society will feel forced to mark these assumptions as true." But, you know, that's EXACTLY what all culture is. Culture is an inescapable part of human life. So, we have to pick and choose which generalizations and stereotypes to be concerned about and fight against. Doing away with generalization and stereotypes is not a possibility, so we shouldn't pretend that it is.

Gingerninja Wrote:I don't remember these types of discussions doing the rounds when Britney spears first appeared at 17 in a school uniform asking to be "hit one more time." I can remember people thinking it was sexualised yes, a bit on the naughty side even, but no guy was ever called a peado for looking twice and or buying tickets to see her shows.

How many middle-aged men bought tickets to her shows though? Did she really have a big Western older male fanbase buying up her records and merchandise?? I don't remember that - her target audience was always young girls.

If a 40 year old guy went by himself to a Britney concert, or nowdays Miley Cyrus, yes he would be called out as creepy!

Gingerninja Wrote:It should be noted that the AKB girls mostly seen in public, with the exception of 2 are over 18, the girls in the singles and promotions with the exception of Watanabe Mayu (17), and SKE's Matsui Jurina(14) (who is a whole other chapter on this problem..) are 18+ . Yes there are younger members but they tend to be kept in the theatre anyway.

You've touched on another important difference that many people are missing in this thread; it's not really about age, it's about perceived innocence. Britney and the girlgroup t.a.t.u were well received in the UK (and seemingly America), as they were marketed as "sexy". People don't have a problem with school uniforms in general, they've been a fetish item forever and it was accepted that the pop artists were wearing them to titillate.

Japan is different in that most idol performers are marketed as pure / innocent / uncorrupted. The school uniform is a symbol of their purity and youthfulness; this is *not* the same as Britney in the "Hit Me Baby.." video!

It's this attraction to youthful purity that Westerns find strange, as it's very similar to the fetishism and powerplay that exists in peadophillia. Arguing they're all over 18 doesn't negate this issue.

It seems the "creepy middle age" Japanese fans are more obsessed over which one has the best personality/is the cutest/the most talented etc, not that they want to stick it in her ass or she has an awesome rack.

Not everything is about sex.

I seem to remember Japan denying a visa to one of the members of KARA for being under 18.... just a legal technicality though.

Jarvik7 Wrote:It seems the "creepy middle age" Japanese fans are more obsessed over which one has the best personality/is the cutest/the most talented etc, not that they want to stick it in her ass or she has an awesome rack.

Not everything is about sex.

Which one is the "cutest" is about sex, or at least sexual attraction. It's based on who is the "purist" rather than who has the best rack.

If it's not about sexuality, then I assume a good portion of their older middle-aged obsessive fanbase are female? If it's just about personality then shouldn't all be men..

If you find your own baby cute, does that mean you want to have sex with it? Do you feel a tingle down there when you see a cute puppy? A previous poster said something about how westerners typically can't think about cuteness without linking it to sex...

I think a lot of the middle-aged men see AKB as ideal surrogate daughters, as their real daughters are actual rebellious teenagers (or they have no daughter to be daddy's little princess) and Japanese men tend to be outsiders in their own families.

Even if it is sexual attraction, who cares. The idealization of youth is hardly a Japanese thing. America has toddler beauty pageants which are far more perverse than AKB, and naughty schoolgirls/barely legal teens are the most common theme you can find in western AV. The age of all the AKB members was marriageable age 100 years ago.

Hate AKB for what they are, a cancer in the music scene.

Tzadeck Wrote:One important difference in this example is that it's not so closely related to a woman's standing in society. You could argue that in a roundabout way it could influence the standing of women in society (For example, that if a woman is highly valued based on her looks, she will not be motivated to improve her standing in professional or political spheres), but only in a round-about way that I'm not very interested in. People have a tendency to be short-sighted in considering that kind of thing.

i don't think Zgarbas' point is about feminism or about a women's standing in society.

It's about men, and their standing.

Frankly, the idea that men are only interested in looks, will choose the youngest girl possible, and will cheat if possible, and it's all fine because "boys will be boys" IS demeaning to men. It limits their role in society, and their own development as moral individuals, don't you think?

looks aren't the only factor for men but it's definitely high on the list. You're deluded if you think otherwise. They won't necessarily choose the youngest but they will generally try to choose the hottest they can get (this has its associated costs which is why most men eventually settle for and are happy with their average looking partners and life goes on) and this can obviously correlate with age.

IceCream Wrote:i don't think Zgarbas' point is about feminism or about a women's standing in society.

It's about men, and their standing.

Frankly, the idea that men are only interested in looks, will choose the youngest girl possible, and will cheat if possible, and it's all fine because "boys will be boys" IS demeaning to men. It limits their role in society, and their own development as moral individuals, don't you think?

Ah, yeah, if you look at it as sexist against men then Zgarbas has more of a point, though I still think using the word 'sexist' is taking it a bit too far. I still don't think that particular belief relates to equality amoung the sexes in a direct enough way for that to be the right word. More like an 'unhelpful stereotype' or 'untrue stereotype.' I admit though that I'm picky about the term sexist, since the word gets used in the media--especially in the American media--in a strange way.

There definitely is pressure on men from their peers to sleep with attractive women and not unattractive women. Depending on the type of people you are friends with, if you sleep with a girl that your friends don't consider attractive it can be a bit hard to tell them, since they might rip on you about it.

I think feminists are just as bad as the people they criticize. Feminists are sexist because they don't realize the problem affects both halves of humanity in separate but equal ways. Men have just as many expectations and roles thrust upon them by society as women do. Many feminists go as far to blame/hate men because of perceived injustices, when the real problem is society as a whole. Women perpetuate gender stereotypes and roles regarding women just as much as men do.

A feminist might agree, but still argue that men are better off because they hold the power and wealth in society.

Yes, men who follow the expectations and roles thrust upon them by society. Women can also follow their assigned roles and become trophy wives of investment bankers. Thinking that it is a worse fate for women to cheapen themselves like that than it is for a man to do something he hates to fill his assigned role is a perfect example of sexism.

Career/money expectations for men are especially bad in Japan. I see the dollar signs light up in women's eyes when I tell them where I work. I see how blue collar men or people who aren't seishain are universally looked down upon as unsuitable marriage partners.

That isn't even going into the every day expectations growing up: being sufficiently muscular, being sufficiently tall, being sufficiently masculine, having sufficiently large genitals, being sufficiently lucky in the gene pool lottery to not go bald, being sufficiently interested in/proficient at sports, being sufficiently interested in cars and owning a sufficiently cool one (not something gay and girly like a VW bug), being sufficiently non-intellectual, being sufficiently not-interested in anything considered feminine lest you be called a fag, being able to drink a sufficient amount of alcohol without getting sick, being sufficiently popular with women, expectations to make all the first moves, pay all the money, do all the planning when dating, etc.

Of course women have similar expectations forced upon them, but society at least recognizes that and it has become less acceptable. A man who wants to be a homemaker or a stay-at-home dad will suffer far more hate and ridicule than a woman who wants to be a career-track office worker. A man who fails to meet the expectations listed above will be bullied more than a woman who likes watching football or who can't cook.

Men are strongly disadvantaged in cases of divorce. Men getting custody of children is less common in the west and near unheard of in Japan. Even if men do get custody, child support payments are less common than in the reverse scenario. Women paying alimony is unheard of. Division of property also tends to favor women.

Men are also disadvantaged in terms of sex. It is treated as something women give (and at times is wielded as a bargaining chip) and men have to seek, instead of something partners share as equals. Men are expected to take all of the responsibility for safe sex (by having condoms ready). This also of course extends to non-medicinal birth control (particularly an issue in Japan where the pill is very uncommon), despite men not having control of the choice to continue or abort should the worst happen. Medicinal birth control for men still, unfortunately, does not exist (I'd take it in an instant). Men are stereotyped as being inherently unfaithful, yet almost every woman I know (many) has told me that they have cheated before and several have no qualms about dating a married man or being being with a guy who already has a girlfriend. Some friends of friends always have 3-7 boyfriends going at a time. Cheating is human nature, not male-nature.

Saying men control money/power so they have it better off should be just as offensive as saying that housewives get to sit around all day watching soap operas so women have it better off. It incredibly oversimplifies the issue and is completely one-sided.

Failing to realize all of this harms women's rights just as much as it does men's rights. Aiming for "empowering women" instead of gender equality is like a defacto acceptance that women are inferior and weak so we've got to give them advantages to keep up. Accepting gender roles for men is a defacto acceptance of gender roles for women.

Before anyone reads too much into this post, I don't think of myself as a victim, but I don't think of women as a group as victims either. Women are successfully challenging their gender roles so there is just more open conflict, making them look like victims.

Wow, great post.

vonPeterhof Wrote:18.3% (Protestantism) + 10.9% (Catholicism) = 29.2% > 22.8% (Buddhism).
In fact I've heard that some Buddhist organizations report institutionalized discrimination against Buddhists and preferential treatment of Christians by the current administration. But yeah, Korea is still not quite a Christian nation, let alone a Catholic one. vix86, maybe you were thinking of the Philippines?

No I actually had meant Christian/Catholic. I'll admit that I really don't know all that much about Korea. I just remember running across some people (celebrities?) from Korea that had self-identified as christian or catholic. And so when I noticed the lack of porn in Korea I had attributed it to that.

Jarvik7 Wrote:It seems the "creepy middle age" Japanese fans are more obsessed over which one has the best personality/is the cutest/the most talented etc, not that they want to stick it in her ass or she has an awesome rack.

Not everything is about sex.

This is true. There does seem to be a fair number of fans that view the younger members as the "little sister" persona.

As an aside. We have a totally derailed this thread

Jarvik7 Wrote:If you find your own baby cute, does that mean you want to have sex with it? Do you feel a tingle down there when you see a cute puppy? A previous poster said something about how westerners typically can't think about cuteness without linking it to sex...

I think a lot of the middle-aged men see AKB as ideal surrogate daughters, as their real daughters are actual rebellious teenagers (or they have no daughter to be daddy's little princess) and Japanese men tend to be outsiders in their own families.

I'm afraid this may be too charitable -- while some people may have those feelings, I think there's a strong sexual component to it. Like I said in an earlier post, this does not necessarily mean that the person wants to have sex with AKB48 members or even girls the same age as them, it can just be fantasy.

Quote:Hate AKB for what they are, a cancer in the music scene.

I'm just tired of seeing them all over the place.

Jarvik7 Wrote:Hate AKB for what they are, a cancer in the music scene.

I thought they were cool before everyone told me they're not. : O