"John R. Yamamoto- Wilson" wrote:

> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>
> > You still don't get that just you is not the "real" Japan.
>
> Eric, we *all* have to process the objective world through our own
> subjective data-procesing units - our eyes, our ears, our brains.

Then you aren't seeing much.

> I can
> accept evidence that fits with what I observe going on around me,

Oh, is that how it works? How convenient. And if separate findings in separate
locations, separated by years show otherwise, they're just exaggerated or
wrong, right?

> but this
> issue we are discussing is highly problematic.

Then I suggest you look into it on your own, and I do not mean by observing
your one train car twice a day or waiting till women with problems come to you.

> The problems stem partly from
> the fact that we are talking about something that is done, by its nature,
> secretively, partly from the fact that newspapers sell copies precisely by
> giving their readership vicarious kicks

The newspapers I've cited and seen are a little more reliable than the
weeklies. You don't seem to have a problem using cites to support your own
views, despite you never being there to witness the matter.

> with stories about subjects like
> this, and partly from the fact that victims will often not speak out.

No, the problem is you not believing except that which you yourself experience
or see. Too common in Japan. Or should I say, you do not believe what you do
not agree with.

> I'm not shrinking from any particular conclusion. I have nothing to win or
> lose here, no vested interests. On the contrary, as a husband and father I
> have every reason to want to get to the bottom of this. But I can't simply
> make a leap of faith and accept that the stories in the newspapers are truer
> than the evidence of my senses. I do realise that there is more going on in
> Japan than I have yet witnessed, but that doesn't mean I'm going to give
> full and unreflected credence to everything I read in the newspapers.

Except as cites to support your own views as regarding politics or history,
perhaps, despite the fact you were never there to see or experience it, either.