Toru Hashimoto, the young, brash mayor of Osaka who is also co-leader of an emerging conservative political party, told reporters that there wasn't clear evidence that the Japanese military coerced women to become what are euphemistically called "comfort women."
"To maintain discipline in the military, it must have been necessary at that time," Hashimoto said. "For soldiers who risked their lives in circumstances where bullets are flying around like rain and wind, if you want them to get some rest, a comfort women system was necessary. That's clear to anyone."
Historians say up to 200,000 women, mainly from the Korean Peninsula and China, were forced to provide sex for Japanese soldiers in military brothels.
Education Minister Hakubun Shimomura said Hashimoto's remark was unhelpful given the criticism Japan faces from neighboring countries and the U.S. over its interpretation of history.
"A series of remarks related to our interpretation of (wartime) history have been already misunderstood. In that sense, Mr. Hashimoto's remark came at a bad time," Shimomura told reporters. "I wonder if there is any positive meaning to intentionally make such remarks at this particular moment."
Hashimoto, 43, is co-head of the newly formed Japan Restoration Party with former Tokyo Gov. Shintaro Ishihara, who is a strident nationalist.
"To maintain discipline in the military, it must have been necessary at that time," Hashimoto said. "For soldiers who risked their lives in circumstances where bullets are flying around like rain and wind, if you want them to get some rest, a comfort women system was necessary. That's clear to anyone."
Apparently he cheated on his wife and has a maid fetish.
That's fine that some form of prostitution was necessary. The problem though is the forced component to it. It almost seems like he's using the comfort women terminology different from how it's generally used.
Indeed. The point is being missed rather substantially. Regulated prostitution = ok. Sexual slavery = not ok.
Why is it being called 'forced prostitution' instead of 'rape and slavery'?
Guy is a dick but to be fair, nowhere in the article did he say that it was "ok". He stated that it was "necessary".
Both opinions are equally reprehensible
Guy is a dick but to be fair, nowhere in the article did he say that it was "ok". He stated that it was "necessary".
To be fair, he could be a weeaboo.Someone would defend the indefensible.
repostcrossposting from other thread:
They've got a loooooong way to go for gender equality when someone even considers saying something like that in public acceptable, even if it's condemned later.
The Mayor of Osaka, who outraged many with remarks about Japans wartime and modern sexual services, has struck back after the United States condemned his comments as outrageous and offensive, accusing American soldiers of using Japanese women for sex during the US occupation of Japan.
During the period of the US occupation of Japan (after the end of the war), the United States also utilised Japanese women. It is outrageous to use women to deal with the sexual (desires of soldiers) in combat areas, he wrote in a series of comments posted on his Twitter account.
It is intolerable to justify Japans utilisation of comfort women. But it is unfair to criticise only Japan.
He was responding to State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki, who on Thursday condemned his comments, calling them outrageous and offensive.
What happened in that era to these women who were trafficked for sexual purposes is deplorable and clearly a grave human rights violation of enormous proportions, she said.
US troops abused Japanese women, charges Osaka Mayor
http://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/us-troops-abused-japanese-women-charges-osaka-mayor
Well that escalated quickly.
I think the big difference is that in Japan's case, the use of comfort women was approved by the higher ups and was systematically set up, while the US soldiers committed crimes on their own. I would imagine it would be a lot more widespread in Japan's case as well. No idea on the actual numbers on the US side
Someone would defend the indefensible.
Thought title said Oscar Meyer
All we was doing is pointing out that Japan wasn't unique in its usage of prostitutes for soldiers.
oh that's not so bad, everybody else was raping women so it must've been necessary for no reason what in the actual fuck
He didn't say it was OK. He said it must have been necessary at the time, but that kind of stuff is unacceptable today.
All we was doing is pointing out that Japan wasn't unique in its usage of prostitutes for soldiers.
So if you disagree with someone it's OK to twist their words to make more sensationalist title?
Are you saying it's necessary to rape?
US troops abused Japanese women, charges Osaka Mayor
http://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/us-troops-abused-japanese-women-charges-osaka-mayor
Well that escalated quickly.
「慰安婦を正当化するつもりはない。しかし、欧米諸国が自らを棚上げして日本だけに責任を負わせ、臭い物にふたをするのは絶対ダメだ」「アメリカだって沖縄の女性に何をしていたのか。ベトナム戦争でも朝鮮戦争でも、慰安所、慰安婦を世界の軍が使っていた」
What he's saying is that organized prostitution was necessary to prevent such rampant raping and keep order among the troops. He's saying that similar systems were used by pretty much any country in war at the time, and while Japan has to take responsibility for their actions in the war, it's unfair that they are being propped up as if they are uniquely a "country of rapists."
He's saying it must have been necessary for the armed forces (of more countries than just Japan) to utilize prostitution in times of war in order to keep order and prevent rape of the general population.
Isn't the objection that the women were forced to be prostitutes? i.e. raped and paid for it?
Also, if it's a patriotic need for Japanese soldiers to have fuck toys (and I say this crudely to illustrate how absurd the assertion is to begin with), why weren't Japanese women conscripted for the purpose?
I only read the OP, so maybe I'm missing some key information, but it sounds like we're talking about mostly Korean and Chinese women, yes?
Why is it being called 'forced prostitution' instead of 'rape and slavery'?
He's saying it must have been necessary for the armed forces (of more countries than just Japan) to utilize prostitution in times of war in order to keep order and prevent rape of the general population.
His position, and that of many others, is that, as of yet, there is no proof that there was a system of "forced prostitution" by the military of Japan.
His position, and that of many others, is that, as of yet, there is no proof that there was a system of "forced prostitution" by the military of Japan.
Why do historians say otherwise? If anyone has reason to spin, delude themselves, or lie, it's this guy, not historians as a group.