"John R. Yamamoto- Wilson" wrote:

>
> I don't want to keep people down, nor do I accept women as victims, and it
> is certainly wrong to say that I don't want Japanese women and their society
> to change for the better.

> It is simply that I do not think that Japan
> becoming (yet) more Americanised and espousing (yet) more American values
> can necessarily be equated with Japan becoming "better".

Equal rights is not an "American" issue, nor is equal rights appropriate only
for westerners.

> > it seems recently I don't know a single middle aged or elderly married
> > woman who actually likes being married, because I hear so often they'd
> LIKE
> > to be divorced or living abroad alone, freed from their husbands or even
> their
> > kids. So why don't they do something about it like women in other
> countries
> > did, and like women even in Japan do, even in this poor economy?
>
> Well, you've pointed out that more and more older women are leaving their
> surprised spouses, so presumably they *are* doing something about it.

Old women dumping their surprised husbands (perhaps even demanding
compensation, I've heard lawyers claim a woman is entitled to up to 40% of the
difference between the husband and wife's pension payments) after their
husbands stop working is cowardly. If they don't like the marriage, get out now
and take responsibility for their choice.

> I have an anecdote here, though, which may be instructive. Across the way
> from us there used to be a bicycle shop, run by a family. The woman,
> especially, was a delightful person, and we used often to stop by for a chat
> with her, her husband or her son. Then, when her son reached adulthood, she
> upped and left. Gradually, the father became morose, the son became
> withdrawn, business slackened off and finally the shop closed down.
>
> Repeat that on a national scale and you've got a problem.

Assuming that everyone would go into depression and lose their jobs, yes that
would be a problem. As it is, it is claimed that the number of Japanese
divorces is one third the number of marriages, which is approaching the one in
two ratio of the US.

And if the woman decides NOT to leave her unhappy or unfulfilling marriage, for
economic reasons or for the alleged sake of the children, do you not see a
nationwide problem with all those unhappy families?

> As I tried to say
> before, Japan has built itself up on the model of "behind every successful
> [male] economic unit is a woman pushing".

So? Is that system of male domination what you claim to be better?

Japan also built itself up on a tradition of self sacrifice to the point of
suicide, inequality and physical discipline or abuse.

Is that what you want?

> As more women continue to assert
> their freedom and independence in this way, more men are going to fall to
> pieces,

Yes. Do you prefer women as second class?

> more economic units are going to become disfunctional

Yes. Do you prefer keeping the women down?

Whether you like it or not, yes, greater freedoms for women are going to come
at a price to men. Even women will have to pay the price for greater
responsibility.

I don't cry too much for the men because male dominance was wrong anyway. And
the women will also have to live with the price they pay for their freedom.

> and, while I
> disagree with them as much as you do, and would look for a radical and
> forward-looking solution,

I suppose you have a kind and gentle radical, forward looking solution that
would not damage the men or social fabric.

> I can quite see why reactionary politicians would
> seek to uphold the old order (=women at home, doing their "duty").

Because they are old fashioned, and are concerned about the conservative voters
such as landowners and farmers.

> > You mean worldwide that people who want money or more money, do not work
> for it
> > at outside jobs? They just live off their husbands or parents like
> Japanese
> > women? That would come to a surprise for the majority of western women.
>
> No, I mean that, by and large, people will follow the line of least
> resistance.

That's not what other countries did.

> > > Oddly enough, Eric, I suspect you are right,
> >
> > Then why not simply say so, and not spend so much time standing up for
> such old
> > fashioned or inefficient ways and defending those who make such
> inflammatory
> > statements about women.
>
> I am not standing up for them or defending them, and will be happy to see
> them go. However, I don't want to see them replaced by yet more
> Americanisation of Japanese culture.

Why is realizing what is wrong with Japan and learning from other countries in
itself wrong? And again, empowerment of women is not American.

> Japan has already gone too far down that road.

Yes, Japan has changed too much. That still does not mean that greater equality
for women is a bad thing.

> I'd like to see Japan develop in its own way and on its own
> terms.

And is that what Japanese women want, too? Strange, that is NOT what I hear or
read from women. They want change, and many changes as seen in other countries.
They just don't want to do the work or make the sacrifices (such as having a
serious career to make a living on their own) themselves.

> That way, when the day comes that I buy a plane ticket to the US, I
> won't just be going from a cultural satellite to the main node.

How is any change desirable or undesirable in Japan not already on "their own
terms"? Japan and Japanese could tell the US to go screw if they wanted, with
any of their economic or political demands or cultural ways, but somehow don't.
If Japanese wanted the US forces out of Japan, and to completely rewrite the
Constitution, they could. They do not.

I do not blame the US for unpleasant aspects of Japan, because it is already
largely Japan's own doing, and their choice.

> > > but try telling *them* that -
> >
> > I do tell them. Mostly I get the same excuses that you give.
>
> You need to separate out my observations from my endorsements. I'm mostly
> pointing out what the objections are, not saying I agree with those
> objections. The principal thing I object to is the idea that Westerners who
> think Japan has "a long way to go" seek to recreate the country in their own
> image.

No, not in "my own" image or in Ernest's image. Change to what is better. It
just so happens that I agree with greater equality for women. There are also
required changes in Japan that are definitely not what I would want, but are
necessary nonetheless. I do not want to pay greater taxes or have a more
authoritarian government over me, but I'd do it for the good of society.

> > > The decision-making machinery here is
> > > based on the idea that if it worked once it will work forever and any
> > > policy, once adopted, is set to run on zircon rails forever.
> >
> > If you believe that is not the case, why don't you try pointing that out?
>
> I do, but the outcome I'm looking forward to is a reassertion/redefinition
> of the *Japanese* identity, not the imposition of some kind of external
> model.

Why is greater equality for women an "external model"? Why don't you understand
it as something Japanese women themselves actually want?

> > some of Japan's more significant rights like women's suffrage
> > came about as a result of losing a war they started
>
> Like the British Empire, there is something to be said for US influence in
> Japan after WWII, but quite a lot to be said against it.

Yes, but it still does not mean that greater equality for women is bad.

BTW, equality is part of the Japanese Constitution. Equality for women, etc.,
is *already* what is supposed to be. It's just that it isn't enforced. So you
see, this treatment of women which you say is part of the reason Japan was able
to grow to what we have in the modern era, is unconstitutional. It is not I who
say so, even the courts are beginning to recognize sexual harassment,
discrimination, etc., as such. It is not Americans enforcing their culture on
Japan, it is what Japan is supposed to have already.

Your comment?

> And, of course, it
> is impossible to know what direction things might have taken without it.

But we are talking about right now. Japan needs change now. If one followed the
Constitution, it should have occurred near 60 years ago.

> > Are you agreeing with me, or claiming I don't know that Japanese women are
> > willing to fight for the rights they want to have?
>
> I'm saying I know some pretty determined women who've taken a pretty
> determined stand in a variety of situations and my classrooms are bursting
> with people who are set to make their mark. I have confidence in them.

Yes, Japan will be much better in a few decades. I am not worried for my own
daughter. But we're talking about now, with tens of millions of women being
discriminated against now.

> > It took well over a century in the US. It really took off about three
> decades
> > ago, and still continues today. I expect it will take Japanese women till
> my
> > daughter grows up to get their act together. I am not worried about my
> > daughter, but if she turns her back on the opportunities available to
> women
> > even today, and makes the choice to be a freeter or housewife (of course I
> > would allow it) she'd better be prepared to live with that decision.
> Beyond
> > graduation, "parasite" is one option not open to my children.
>
> Spoken like a true Protestant!

What does this have to do with me being raised a Protestant? Japanese may have
no religion, but Japanese women want greater equality for themselves, and the
concern for the younger generations of Japan is also a Japanese phenomenon.