Even before the whole prostitution discussion, I think this thread was derailed.  I think the OP wanted people to talk about their personal experiences and whether they regretted learning Japanese and were disappointed upon their first real encounter with Japan.  It wasn't supposed to degenerate into: "Japan is terrible!" "No it's not!" Moreover, visiting Japan and living there are two different things.  I don't think getting jaded after 5 years of residence is the same thing as visiting there and quickly finding it wasn't all you had hoped.

IceCream wrote:

It's too easy to let other people's negativity affect your own view, and you start to view things through a negative lens where you might not just by thinking about it on your own. The only advice i'd give is try to keep away from westerners with a chip on their shoulder, and stick with people who do enjoy life in Japan when you do go, and hopefully you'll end up with a more balanced opinion.

Agreed.

@Sean2 It would be interesting if you would talk a little more about your friends who regretted studying Japanese, although it sounds like you have had good experiences with Japan.

Since I still have the floor, I'll ask: Why does Japan even engender these kinds of discussions anyway?  Do sinophiles have these kinds of discussions?  Isn't it possible to like a country and be interested in it in spite of the fact that it has many social problems?  I'm sure Russia, say, has lots of problems, and yet there are people who are very interested in the Russian language, Russian literature, Russian history, etc. (Not trying to pick on Russia, just an example).

It was pointed out before a sinister correlation between Japan's often ridiculous reactions toward drug use compared to the western world and the generally perceived views in several of these countries towards prostitution and/or soft-pornography involving minors and Japan's own views. The fact that Japan has not been ruined by the organized Church may be an important reason why the whole issue of sex has never been seen as it is on the west.

FYI, in countries where this issue about sex is, well, not really an issue, women (admittedly the victims in the story) have grown above all this risible 'psychological impact' balderdash and realized we are not living in a kindergarten, you have to take care of yourself, period. Is not as bad as "don't get away from the pride pussy or you will be ambushed by the other cats", but if you are lured into having sex by a seductive alpha male and then dumped, well too bad for you, is your fault for not being more quick on the uptake. In any case, is not a tragedy.

That about teenagers not being able to make good decisions is usually true, but the way I like to think about it is nature's self-correcting mechanism for character. We learn from our mistakes duh. We also learn from our friend's mistakes so not every single 14 year old girl is conned into the monstrous act of sex.

**

Last edited by turvy (2012 February 10, 7:26 pm)

There is no such thing as ugliness. We are all the same animal. I just don't take this social framework enveloping us extremely serious, just like my own views are not really often views but reactions. I try not to hold on to whatever seems undoubtedly logical at the moment given my current understanding of the cosmos.

Hey look at the bright side, we didn't get as far as to talk about the Nazis.

Last edited by turvy (2012 February 10, 7:38 pm)

kainzero wrote:

Right now I'm thinking about Grad School and possibly studying in Japan, so I looked up Waseda University. I found this case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Free

3 counts of rape -- 14 years?
In the US, it's 25 to life for each one.

On top of that, they introduced punishment for gang rapes after the case. Minimum 4 years... that's it.

I am more interested in the punishment of this guy in Kyoto than what he was caught up with.

Drug smuggling will/can get you jailed for upward to 14 years with forced labor in Japan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_John_Baker)
First time offenses in the US will get you 1-3 years.

Theft in some countries will lose you a hand.

The point is that you are applying your view on "right and proper" punishment to this case and I guess some others. There isn't some arbitrary guideline that people can look at and then decide crimes of A have 4 years of punishment, Crimes of B have 10 Years, those others just get you 1. The weight of the punishment for the crime done is culturally defined. Now if the point you were making was simply that "Japan has too lax punishment compared to other countries and I think they should be harsher." Then that is a perfectly fine view to take.

turvy wrote:

There is no such thing as ugliness.

Ugliness maybe isn't the right word. IcreCream simply thinks I'm some sort of non-feeling human. I realized after sleeping on it that I was trying arguing the issue on sex/prostitution the whole time, from a cold calculating view that there was too much extent of the law and that 16yr olds were generally capable enough to make some decisions on having sex with people and with a stranger. Other side was arguing with the humanizing mindset that 16 yr olds are mentally handicapped and can't make any sound decisions on the issues so there should be laws protecting them. Lots of anecdotes thrown around and hand-waving and pointing at correlation studies, but no real proof supporting anything. So both sides have just decided the other side is too inhuman and dense to see the truth of the matter.

Jarvik7 wrote:

Hitler liked underage prostitution.

For something that is a bit less of an obvious troll, I'm surprised no one brought up Japan being a former Axis member or behaviour/lack of apology (according to Koreans) for such during WW2.

LOL

Although I play by the rules of society and have no intentions to stop doing so, I can't justify that there could be an intrinsic moral quality in any form of life, my rational side and current position is that there is no such thing as morality. Killing, raping, stealing, that used to be acceptable, that used to be the means of survival. Fortunately we have evolved socially for the last 2000 years and now recognize that such generalized behavior can only be detrimental if we mean to further our species towards advancement.

However, there is not a default moral quality, we made that up. For the sake of consistency we can all agree to play by the rules and enforce their observance, because if only one person breaks them why wouldn't the next person do as well?, that would lead to anarchy and ruin the collective effort of our species of the last 2 millennia. However, in a case by case basis, if you could get away with committing any crime that wouldn't change absolutely nothing. That idea bothers me.

There is no 'ugliness'.

kainzero wrote:

I didn't apply my view on anything. I simply offered the US as comparison.

Ah. Alright. I see what you mean.

"The weight of the punishment for the crime done is culturally defined."
I disagree, it shouldn't be linked at all to "culture."
I read an article about how a woman in a Middle Eastern country was raped. She went to jail for being raped. She then had to marry her rapist to save face, otherwise her family would be embarrassed and punished severely.

Is that fair?
Where do we draw the line on human rights?

I'm not arguing that it should be culturally defined. I'm was merely pointing out that because so much can be subjective and that there isn't some rubric you can pull out and quantify the damage of a situation in "universal terms." This is why I said it was "culturally defined" because in one culture you might have a crime that is extremely abhorrent due to the culmination of cultural history while the same crime in another country gets you nothing in the way of punishment. Which country has the more "fair" and "just" punishment could be a matter of great debate depending on the situation.

Taken to extremes and perverted, you end up with shit like the Middle East in the exact kind of case you mentioned.

vix86 wrote:

turvy wrote:

There is no such thing as ugliness.

Ugliness maybe isn't the right word. IcreCream simply thinks I'm some sort of non-feeling human. I realized after sleeping on it that I was trying arguing the issue on sex/prostitution the whole time, from a cold calculating view that there was too much extent of the law and that 16yr olds were generally capable enough to make some decisions on having sex with people and with a stranger. Other side was arguing with the humanizing mindset that 16 yr olds are mentally handicapped and can't make any sound decisions on the issues so there should be laws protecting them. Lots of anecdotes thrown around and hand-waving and pointing at correlation studies, but no real proof supporting anything. So both sides have just decided the other side is too inhuman and dense to see the truth of the matter.

... Did you even read my post? You're obviously not really listening to anything "the other side" is actually saying, my post was based on logic and nothing in my arguments can be said to be objectively wrong. No, really, it was.

Turvy: Women who are raped in non-westernized countries don't suffer emotional trauma? What? What are you basing that statement on? Word on the street? There are so many women from any country you might think of that suffer from PTSD and other kinds of mental injury during many years following rape. It is a form of assault - don't you realize that as humans we react to attacks like that with strong fear (especially if we experience powerlessness) and pain, and that these feelings BIOLOGICALLY leave remaining scars for many humans since the memories jump up now and then and activate our amygdala, our pain centres etc.? Emotional trauma following rape/sudden bereavement/war experience and so on isn't just something that has been 'made up' by Western society, that makes no sense. Being seriously hurt physically in a situation out of our control, especially by others, has always and always will have lasting effects on us as humans. Western values and stigma towards rape might exacerbate the lingering feelings by adding guilt/shame as well as less chances of talking to people about it and so on, sure, but you can't just say that the whole thing is made up.

Also, GOD DAMN. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p4iY3aIxzI

vix86 wrote:

Surreal wrote:

... Did you even read my post? You're obviously not really listening to anything "the other side" is actually saying, my post was based on logic and nothing in my arguments can be said to be objectively wrong. No, really, it was.

I saw your post I just chose not to address it because I've been trying to bow out of this discussion since it really isn't going anywhere.
Your post used the bell curve as a way to provide credence to why 18 is arbitrarily the age for sex with a minor versus say 16. How ever there isn't anything remotely conclusive to showing this. The only things that have been linked to date have been posts to Wiki where plenty of correlational studies were done shown various negative effects that are correlated with teens have sex.

No. I was talking about 25yos compared to 16yos and if you've lived until the age of 25 you should have all the evidence you need of that 25yos are as a group more biologically mature and on average are much better at planning ahead and making conscious decisions. I was not trying to justify 18 as the "adult" age, nor as the age for when you can't have sex with a minor (in my country it's not even illegal anyhow as long as the minor is fifteen years or older and there is no payment and/or coercion involved).

And you keep missing my point, which is that you have to LOOK AT THE GROUP. Sure, there are 16yos that would be just as fit to decide whether prostitution is something that they want as most 25yos are, but they are FEW. And the differences between adults AS A GROUP and non-adults AS A GROUP are extremely huge - sure there will be some INDIVIDUALS within the 'adult' group between which the difference is even greater than that, but that doesn't change the fact that non-adults are a disadvantaged GROUP when compared to adults and so in the great MAJORITY of adult-nonadult relationships there will be a severe power imbalance and so it is very reasonable for society to try to implement certain limitations on adults in their behavior toward non-adults so that that power imbalance will be abused less. It's not a perfect system and there will be some INDIVIDUALS for which it isn't ideal but society has to work on a rough level with GROUPS.

I wasn't saying that all of the problems related to prostitution (abusive relationships, fear of telling others of violence because of shame and fear because partner has a relatively higher social position, etc.) are exclusively caused by prostitution. However, prostitution will often make these problems worse (by intensifying the power imbalance by giving the richer part an easy way to exert their power) and prohibiting adults from paying non-adults for sexual acts means that part of what gives them an advantage is "counter-handicapped", you might think of it as levelling the playing field. This isn't the only reason for prohibiting non-adult prostitution but I think it should make clear what I've been trying to say.

turvy wrote:

It was pointed out before a sinister correlation between Japan's often ridiculous reactions toward drug use compared to the western world and the generally perceived views in several of these countries towards prostitution and/or soft-pornography involving minors and Japan's own views. The fact that Japan has not been ruined by the organized Church may be an important reason why the whole issue of sex has never been seen as it is on the west.

FYI, in countries where this issue about sex is, well, not really an issue, women (admittedly the victims in the story) have grown above all this risible 'psychological impact' balderdash and realized we are not living in a kindergarten, you have to take care of yourself, period. Is not as bad as "don't get away from the pride pussy or you will be ambushed by the other cats", but if you are lured into having sex by a seductive alpha male and then dumped, well too bad for you, is your fault for not being more quick on the uptake. In any case, is not a tragedy.

That about teenagers not being able to make good decisions is usually true, but the way I like to think about it is nature's self-correcting mechanism for character. We learn from our mistakes duh. We also learn from our friend's mistakes so not every single 14 year old girl is conned into the monstrous act of sex.

**

So, after reading your most recent post, should I interpret that middle paragraph in the quote as you saying that screw society and all its rules because it's built on an arbitrary value system and hooray for anarchy? Or do you mean that we should, instead of saying "rape is wrong", say "since I have a fundamental belief in human rights as well as wish as little harm as possible to come to people in general, I think, in relation to my own belief system, that rape is wrong"? That's mostly just a matter of not wanting to be so long-winded, I think.  Either way, it's really hard to understand what you're even trying to say because of how you use the English language, turvy. That's not meant as an insult either, I've really tried to read your posts multiple times but I can't quite grasp what you're getting at.

Surreal wrote:

So, after reading your most recent post, should I interpret that middle paragraph in the quote as you saying that screw society and all its rules because it's built on an arbitrary value system and hooray for anarchy?.

I don't think his most recent post is linked to the post you quoted ( I could be wrong). It seems like the most recent post is merely trying to argue that 'right' and 'wrong' are subjective concepts within the framework of morals. There are no rights are wrongs set down in stone somewhere. Everything is subjective.

The quoted post is trying to say that there are countries where their society has decided to weigh issues differently. Doing drugs in Japan seems to be a grave act and any one that does it; deserving of years in prison. But a woman lured into sex by a witty male, in some societies, would merely suck up the experience as "Shame on me, won't happen again." While in other countries she might instead turn to the law/media and use the 'high octane nature' of sex, to make it a big issue. But arguing this with rape though.....

How I read his post.

Last edited by vix86 (2012 February 11, 10:21 am)