From: masuda@fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov (Michiaki Masuda)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan
Subject: Re: Not a Myth at All
Date: 10 Jan 93 19:04:18 GMT
Organization: Frederick Cancer Research and Development Center

In article <1993Jan09.221919.12317@gibdo.engr.washington.edu> tvp@gibdo.engr.washington.edu (Tad Perry) writes:
>In article <C0LuA2.EL8@ncifcrf.gov> masuda@fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov (Michiaki Masuda) writes:
.....
>>  "Some gaijin caused trouble at the bar." -> "Gaijin cause trouble." ->
>>"Gaijin okotowari."
>>
>>  "Some people with irezumi caused trouble at the bar." -> "People with
>>irezumi cause trouble." -> "Irezumi okotowari."
>>
>> These two mental processes look analogous.

>They are highly analogous. But the arrows in one case are assigning
>characteristics to a race. That's bad. In the other case they are
>assigning characteristics to a group of tattoed people. Has nothing to
>do with race. Nothing wrong with that.

  To my eys, both look wrong. I met a Japanese bus driver who had a gorgeous
irezumi, and as you might know, quite a few American "decent" citizens have
tattoos.

  If we attach a certain characteristics of a part of a certain group to all 
the people in the group stereotypically, that would be and should be regarded
wrong. 
  
>1. Smoking. It is perfectly legal to discriminate against a smoker.

  It is possible to demonstrate the biological effect of smoke scientifically
objectively. On the other hand, the effect of "irezumi" or "gaijin" is
highly variable.
 
>2. Dumb people. It is perfectly legal to give what amount to
>intelligence tests in employing people and accepting them to public
>and private learning institutions.

  Therefore, shopowners or landlords who have "gaijin okotowari" policy
should abondon the policy and instead start the language exam, which is 
legally justifyable.

>3. Criminals. It is perfectly legal to discriminate against criminals.
>Their right to vote is taken away.

   "Criminals okotowari" is ok because all the people in the "criminals"
group are criminals.
 
> Any potential employer is allowed
>not to hire you based on your criminal record.

   As for the treatment of ex-criminal, I don't know exactly about the 
regulation in Japan. However, if there is a universal understanding that 
all the ex-criminals will be criminals again, I think that that is also a
questionable stereotype.

> Shop owners are allowed
>to tell you to get out.

   Uh, not me. I have a clean record except for a parking ticket.

>There is something wrong with "gaijin okotowari". There is nothing
>wrong with "irezumi okotowari".
.....
> You just
>haven't made the next step and learned how to distinguish *racial*
>discrimination from other types. You talk about a definition of racism
>where the *characteristic* of a race is used to discriminate.

   Then you might want to make the next step to learn that any stereotyped
view is wrong whether it is based on race, religion, nationality, sex, age,
physical ablities, or irezumi. Your statement put me under the impression 
that anything goes but the discrimination based on race.

>Somewhere you decided that Americans and South Africans discriminate
>against blacks only because they are black. Not at all. They go
>through the same mental process you outlined above:

>  bad experiences, or rumoured bad experiences, with blacks ->
>  blacks have nasty characteristic(s) a, b, c,... -> therefore
>  I don't want blacks living next to me or working for me.

  Then, my question is, "What made those black people have bad reputations?"

>This is, by the way, the definitive argument against your stand.
>Check. Mate in two moves.

  Actually, this will be my last move since I have to leave here tomorrow.
If you could mail me a copy of your next move, I might be able to show
how I escape the check mate in February. 

--Michiaki