John Yamamoto-Wilson wrote:

> > > I stick to what I said before. The most successful
> > > (or, if you prefer, the most professional) pickpockets work in
> > > pairs.
> >
> > Now, I'm going to ask you why.
>
> I told you the logical reasons; basically, it's the most efficient unit.
> I've been holding back on the experiential ones, but as a younger man I
> frequently had recourse to gaining my bread as a street musican, and the
> fact that pickpockets generally work in twos was a matter of common
> knowledge and simple observation.

We are talking about reality, particularly in Japan, not your "common
knowledge" or "simple observation". I don't seek out information on pick
pockets, but at least I saw some not based on my own lack of experience or
knowledge.

> > > most of the women I know have
> > > been abused and (presumably) most of the men I know are guilty of
> inflicting
> > > such abuse. And it's all happening on trains I travel on every day and
> yet I
> > > don't even see it.
> >
> > I didn't say any of those things, and realize your above statements were
> not
> > serious. This is just more of your sarcasm and denial.
>
> No, Eric. It's not. I realised you might think so, but if what you and
> Ernest are saying is correct

Do not group us together, as I am not with Ernest or his claim.

> then that is the corollary. Perhaps you *are*
> right, and my general tendency to see the world through positive eyes

It's not a matter of seeing the world through positive eyes, it's only looking
at your own life, not what you refer to as the "real" Japan.

> and think the best of people has blinded me to the truth.

Your comfortable life has lulled you into a false sense of security. You are
not blinded. You choose not to look.

> I'm just going through the implications of what that would entail.

Chikan and pickpockets aside, why don't you simply realize that all you see is
not all there is, not even just what is immediately around you.

> > I don't know how you talk to people about it, but I suggest it done in
> private,
> > or among small groups of people who trust each other. Not, for example, in
> the
> > college classroom. You may understand that sex crime victims do not want
> to be
> > recognized or identified.
>
> It would be quite inappropriate for me to discuss this online, but when I
> say soul-baring discussion I do mean it. I've had a larger than usual share

What does this mean? What's a usual share?

> of exposure to distressed people and the causes of their distress and while,
> as I say, this issue has come up, it has nothing like the kind of prevalence
> it ought to have if you and Ernest *were* right.

You are assuming that representative amounts of victims of pickpocketing or
molestation would indeed be suffering tangible problems (they do not), and
would also seek you out. Do you believe anything like that to be the case?

> Which is why I'm still not prepared to subscribe fully to your view.

You still don't get that just you is not the "real" Japan.