Eric Takabayashi wrote:

> > > Call the police. Bring the victim to the police. If you think it is
safe,
> > > apprehend the person yourself.
> >
> > Um, how? Do I just say, in a very loud voice, "Police!" and expect one
to
> > suddenly appear on a moving train?
>
> Use a telephone or go to a police box to report it, like regular people
do.

Oh, I see, you mean I should report the incident after the event? I thought
you meant I should do something that would bring the criminals to justice.

> One or any of the about 200,000 police officers working in Japan. Maybe
your
> community has some, too.
>
> > By what powers, natural or supernatural, could I have conjured
> > the police into this situation?
>
> The telephone is a common method.

Even if I had a mobile phone (which I don't) I don't think these people
would have waited politely while I called the police.

> > Anyway, I couldn't even have sworn to the
> > two people responsible. All I saw was a hand pass a wallet into another
> > person's hand. I guessed at the faces matching the hands, but this was a
> > crowded train. I could have been wrong. That's why pickpockets choose to
> > operate in them; it's almost impossible to pin down the culprits.
>
> So you mention two you've seen to far. Do you believe there are more, even
on
> just your train?

If you mean do I think there were more than two culprits, I doubt it. If
they were being professional about their work they would stick to two
people, because the necessary number of people to pull off successful
pickpocketing is two, and having even one more person on board would - among
other hazards - double the chances of being ripped off by an accomplice and
greatly increase the chances of attracting attention to themselves. No,
two's company, three's a crowd in that game.

If you mean do I think the two incidents I saw are the total of what's out
there, of course I don't.

> > The person who'd stolen the
> > wallet had passed the goods on to someone else.
>
> Too bad you aren't street wise enough to recognize the person who ends up
with
> the stolen items.

I'm street wise enough to know what the game is, and street wise enough to
know it's done in crowded places precisely in order to make it well-nigh
impossible to know who the goods are being passed along to. You don't seem
to be aware of either fact, and you're still sneering about the street wise
bit, even though I told you not to, but there you go. Suit yourself...

> It's the job of the police or prosecutor to get evidence, even if you have
> none. You know the truth of the matter.

Ah. Ericworld.

> > The norm is the norm. If you want it as defined by the dictionary it
means
> > "what is expected or regared as normal;
>
> But what is "normal"? One could argue that crime in and of itself is not
> normal.

OK, you're still having difficulty with this. I'll try again. The expression
"the norm" is used to describe things in their customary or habitual state.
We can leave out moral arguments about what is or is not "normal" behaviour,
not because they have no relevance at all, but because we can deal with it
much more simply by looking at it in terms of frequency. If you generally
have coffee in the morning and once in about six months you have tea, then
coffee for breakfast is the norm. Similarly, if you go to work by train
every day without incident and once in about six months there's some kind of
incident - a fight, a pickpocket, a chikan - then the days without incident
are the norm.

For about three years I travelled to work from an outlying suburb and got to
recognise people's faces and patterns of behaviour quite well. There was one
very strikingly attractive woman who used to make eye contact with me (we
never spoke), and we often ended up next to, or quite close to each other,
all the way to Shinjuku (sometimes I was with my wife, sometimes not - about
50/50, I guess). Now, if that woman had ever been the victim of any kind of
chikan I'm pretty sure I would have noticed. I'm also pretty sure (from the
way she put down an ojisan who started trying to talk to her in a way she
didn't like one day - not overtly sexual, she just wasn't taking any
nonsense) that she wouldn't have just suffered in silence. Nothing ever
happened.

These days, there's a very pleasant middle aged lady who frequently seeks me
out on the morning train for a chat. Again, I just can't see that she's
being groped before my eyes and I'm not noticing it. *Please*, some of you
fjlijers who use the trains regularly, are my experiences that unusual, for
pity's sake? Is everybody else observing downcast eyes and hearing subdued
squeals of protest from women passengers stressed beyond endurance because
of unwanted male attention while travelling, or do things seem pretty calm
and peaceful - regular faces making eye contact, people behaving in a
civilised and decent fashion? Am I (for some reason best known to the gods)
living in Noddy land while everyone else is in some hardcore nittygritty
Japan where women grit their teeth and get the daily grope over with before
putting in a day's work at the office?

> Try a percentage. If over three quarters of women respond to survey in a
> national paper that they've been molested on the trains, that sounds like
a
> real serious problem to me. It was disgusting enough that women reported
it
> happened repeatedly or were victimized by several men at the same time.

Yes, I'm not happy to hear about such things either. And I don't want to
underestimate the seriousness. I would, however, like to get it very clear
what we are talking about here. You say "molested", but how much of this
behaviour went beyond lecherous looks, innuendo and a demeaning use of
language? Are you very clear that it was all actually *physical*? I ask this
for several reasons, but the only one I am advancing here is that I travel
frequently on the trains and, despite being quite attentive (I have a
tremendous interest in the behaviour of my fellow man - and woman) have seen
remarkably little of such behaviour.

I have to say, though, that a situation where several men victimise a woman
would hardly escape the attention of other passengers, and as such didn't
really come under my definition of chikan. To me, that kind of thing comes
under the more general term "sekuhara" (sexual harassment), while chikan is
a particular *manifestation* of sekuhara (the furtive grope). So I want to
get it very clear what kinds of situations are covered by your statistics.

Now, I have *never* seen a woman being groped by a group of men, on a train
or anywhere else, in Japan or anywhere else. However, I've seen plenty of
situations on Japanese trains where there's been some kind of altercation
between a woman and a man or group of men. By their nature, such
altercations are far more visible than the actions of the groper. Usually,
the woman just moves away while things are still at the verbal stage, or
gets rescued by other bystanders if the man (who is usually drunk) makes a
sudden lurch at her. However, she would be quite right to say that she had
been harassed, and if the figures you are citing include incidents like
these (where the abuse was verbal or, while physical, was nipped in the bud)
then I think we should get that clear.

I've also seen situations where, when people are regularly taking the same
commuter train (especially in the morning), a kind of stalking goes on. My
wife and I noticed some strange behaviour from a young man when she and I
were travelling together to work some years ago. He would try and place
himself between us and edge his way closer to her, with his back to me.
Nothing ever came of it, but if you were to give my wife a questionnaire and
say was she harassed she would quite likely say yes. Equally likely, though,
since it happened years ago, she might have forgotten all about it. If your
statistics for repeated harassment include cases like this (where there was
an *implied* threat, but no actual abuse, either physical or verbal) then,
again, I think we should get it clear.

Then there are those situations where a group of men and women, perhaps
after a party of co-workers, are travelling home together and one of the men
steps out of line. there will be a squeal, perhaps, a cry of "yada!", a
moment of tension. Then it will pass and things will be back to "normal". Do
your statistics include that kind of altercation?

If, on the other hand, your statistics really are those for women who have
been groped and humiliated then let's get that clear too. But we can't
really discuss the statistics until and unless we know what they represent.
The only thing I will stick my neck out for is that chikan is not "the norm"
for Japanese men.

> > So why are you so damned sure that it is normal for people to be groping
> > unwilling victims on trains?
>
> Because it happens so much. Groping people is what chikan are famous for
doing.

Well, it's what chikan do *by definition*. But maybe you mean like gaijin
are famous for going totally apeshit? I'll bet there's a survey that proves
99% of Japanese people have had experience of *that*!

> > Let me assure you, as one who uses them
> > frequently, that such behaviour is very much the exception. It is not
the
> > rule.
>
> You mean you just haven't seen it yourself, or don't know enough victims
who've
> told you about it.

I think I've given you plenty of examples which make it clear that (a) I use
the trains (you don't) and (b) I keep my eyes pretty well open (whereas from
what you say half the time you wouldn't recognise a pickpocketing scam if
you saw one and it wouldn't surprise me if the same went for a chikan
operating under your nose). As for (c) I've got a lot of firsthand accounts
to draw on and probably have a much better idea of what goes on than you do,
that's really not something I'm prepared to discuss here. As I say, I don't
want to underestimate this problem, but no way am I prepared to let some
punk get away with saying "for Japanese men chikan is the norm".

> > > In japan, chikan is the rule for men, not the exception. [Ernest
Schaal]
>
> I don't know what it means, and I didn't ask. It could mean that Ernest
claims
> Japanese men are chikan as a rule. Huh.
>
> > Like I say, believe it if you like -
>
> I didn't comment on Ernest's statement.
>
> > I really couldn't care less,
>
> You care enough to respond to numerous posters on it.

Yeah, I guess you're right. And I'm typing a reply at 4:30 a.m., so you
*must* be right. OK, my momentary exasperation has passed; please *don't*
believe it, Eric! A belief in the essential goodness of the human race
should extend to Japanese men as much as to anyone else. Ask the idiot
politicians whether they'd make the same kinds of statements if it was their
own wives and daughters who were the victims and I suspect even they would
waver, if not crumple.

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com