John Yamamoto-Wilson wrote:

> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>
> > This month I read the claim that 60%? of child porn online originates
> > in the US. A far cry from the time maybe 80% was claimed to originate
> > in Japan.
>
> Hmm. And did you believe that 80% claim at the time?

I could see how it was possible, because according to relevant news stories,
even foreign organizations were using Japanese servers to host their foreign
porn in Japan. Perhaps this was in an effort to support their own countries'
laws, because one can see for example, how European law enforcement has had
large scale international crackdowns on online child porn for years.

> What do you think now?
> That times have changed that much, or that the claim was false, or what?

Japan has enacted laws against child porn online, and there is at least some
action by law enforcement made public (though it seems to be on the individual
offender basis), so there is probably less. It is that simple. What I am
curious about is why a UN body would claim this year that maybe 60% of child
porn online is from the US, when the US supposedly has laws against child porn.
I do see an increasing number of onscreen links and popups featuring pictures
or sites of young or young looking women, and get a hell of a lot of related
spam, however.

> I am, of course, reminded of the figures you cited for chikan a couple of
> years ago, suggesting that Japanese women were more likely than not to have
> been groped on the trains. Take a look at
> http://ballz.ababa.net/uninvited/groping.htm. It says:
>
> "In 2001, a survey of two private high-schools in Tokyo revealed that more
> than 70% had been groped on the train."
>
> Remember how you used statistics in the region of 70% to defend the
> allegation that groping women in the trains was "the norm" in Japan?
> Well, now that the hysteria has died down a bit the statistics are starting
> to look rather different. The same source says:
>
> "A recent survey of Japanese companies suggested that at least 17% of
> Japanese women have been groped."
>
> 17% is "a far cry" from 70%, isn't it? Of course, as far as I'm concerned,
> *any* percentage is too much, so I'm not defending the perps here. I just
> want to show how unreliable that 70% percent statistic was.

It is different. You say it is a survey of companies. The over three quarters
figure was a survey of girls and women under IIRC, 23 years of age about ten
years ago.

> Have things changed that much in the last few years, or were those very high
> figures inflated for some reason? The number of reported cases is continuing
> to rise sharply, and women continue to feel threatened, so I doubt chikan
> behaviour has slumped in the way the figures might suggest. Alternative
> explanations seem more likely.

Again, you neglect the fact that stricter laws have been enacted against train
molestation, and that still stricter laws are being considered. Chikan even now
can walk away from a charge if they pay 50,000 yen, with no jail time, and a
blemish on their criminal record. If there is not some commotion due to the
accused being a teacher or some high profile figure, or the accused does not
fight the charge, it is possible to avoid publicity. Also, as a recent rise in
arrests (despite a decline in claims) shows, more women (and bystanders) are
now emboldened to apprehend and report abuse.

> For example, it could just be that what was happening in two high schools
> wasn't representative of the country as a whole. It could even be that
> respondents felt it somehow more charismatic to claim (anonymously and on
> paper) that they had been groped, or that if they said they had not it might
> somehow reflect on their attractiveness as females. It's not that difficult
> to imagine kids using claims of having been groped as a way of establishing
> credibility with their peers. Or whatever.

At the least, it was women in the Tokyo region, not "two high schools", and I
don't know where you got that from.

> I'd also like to point out how you jumped on those very high statistics in
> defence of a racist and prejudiced agenda.

What racist and prejudiced agenda? If over three quarters of young women say
they have been molested on trains, then that is what they say. If women in the
US reported the same to police or support groups, I'd listen to them, too.

> You thought that, in the light of
> the 70% statistic, Ernest Schaal was justified in claiming that
>
> > In japan, chikan is the rule for men, not the exception
> (http://tinyurl.com/5yy2q)
>
> Remember? OK, then, now that they're saying 60% of child pornography
> originates in the US I guess you and he will be perfectly comfortable with
> the following statement:
>
> "In America, paedophilia is the rule for adults, not the exception."
>
> Well?

60% of child pornography orignates in the US, is not the same as 60% of young
women say they have been molested. Do you see a difference?

If you told me that 60% of young women in the US have been molested, I would
agree with you. Even sex US assault data I have seen and *I* have posted here
do not suggest that.