NJ dot com (New Jersey dot com) has published an article about how ‘enslaved women’ of World War 2 had setup ‘Comfort Stations’ specifically for American GI’s.
Eric Talmadge of The Associated Press wrote this article which if found to be factually accurate could have severe consequences in the world of American politics which respect to how they deal with the issue. Not to mention the fact that American GI’s would be guilty of rape and soliciting prostitution. Of course some troops no matter what country will get drunk while on tour and do stupid things. Right, human nature I guess. But the issue here in this article is that the author is suggesting that Americans took advantage of ‘Comfort Women’, defined as being a selection of woman forced into prostitution.
Here is a portion of Mr. Talmadge’s report.
An Associated Press review of historical documents and records shows American authorities permitted the official brothel system to operate despite internal reports that women were being coerced into prostitution. The Americans also had full knowledge by then of Japan’s atrocious treatment of women in countries across Asia that it conquered during the war.
Tens of thousands of women were employed to provide cheap sex to U.S. troops until the spring of 1946, when Gen. Douglas MacArthur shut the brothels down.
From John Dower’s book, “Embracing Defeat,” pp. 126-127, paperback edition.
“Enlisting a small number of women to serve as a buffer protecting the chastity of the “good” women of Japan was well-established policy in dealing with Western barbarians. Special pleasure quarters had been set up for foreigners immediately after Commodore Perry forced the country to abolish its policy of seclusion, and in modern mythology one young woman who gave her body for the nation had already been glorified as a patriotic martyr. Her name was Okichi, and she had been assigned as a consort for Townsend Harris, the first American consul, who assumed his duties in 1856. The procurers of the 1945 appropriated her sad, sensual image in defining their own task. The women they were assembling, they declared, would be Showa no Tojin Okichi, ” the Okichis of the present era.”
To the government’s surprise, professional prostitutes proved reluctatnt to become latter-day Okichis. By one account, they were fearful that the Americans, commonly portrayed as demonic figures in wartime propaganda, possessed oversized sexual organs that could injure them. The organizers of the special comfort facilities thus undertook to recruit ordinary women by posting a large signboard addressed “To New Japanese Women” in the Ginza district of downtown Tokyo. “As part of ugent national facilities to deal with the postwar,” this read, somewhat vaguely, “we are seeking the active cooperation of new Japanese women to participate in the great task of comforting the occupation force.” The solicitation also mentioned openings for “femal office clerks, aged between eighteen and twenty-five. Housing, clothing, and food supplied.”
Most of the women attracted by this advertisement arrived for their interviews shabbily dressed. Some, it was said, were ven barefoot. The great majority had no expeience in the “water trade” of the red-light districts, and most left when informed what their actual duties would be. . . ”
Continuing on to page 129.
“Neither beds, futons, nor room partitions were yet available, and fornication took place without privacy everywhere, even in the corridors. Later Japanese accounts of the scene tend to be irate, speaking of shameless “animalistic intercourse” that showed the “true colors” of so-called Americaa civilization. The local police chief is said to have wept.
One naive recruit to the RAA later recalled the terror of her fist day, when seh was called on to service twenty-three American soldiers. By one estimate, RAA women engaged between fifteen and sixty GIS a day. A nineteen-year old who previously had been a typist committed suicide immediately. Some women broke down and deserted.”
From page 130.
“Despite its popularity and intial support from the victors, the RAA did not survive the early months of the occupation. In January 1946, occupation authorities ordered the abolition of all “public” prostitution, declaring it undemocratic and in violation of women’s human rights. Privately, the acknowledged that their major motivation was an alarming rise in venereal disease among the troops.”
Doesn’t say much for either government.
Thank Marie. That adds a lot to Mr. Talmadge’s report.
Mockett-san, Your report shows that prostitution for army was a universal thing.
I think one reason, why comfort women issue became such a big deal, was that Japan had been once an evil empire and LOST the war. The problem is not just about the denials of some Japanese politician
on that issue.
And South Korea and China will take some political advantage from it.
Soldiers soliciting prostitutes??????????
Goodness. . .
Now I normally do not do this (in fact, this is very first time I have), but I really must take issue with the way this information is presented here.
First the title, “GIs frequented Japan’s ‘comfort women,’” which is lifted directly from NJ dot com, and was not used in the paper where I saw this piece. This title suggests that U.S. GIs walked in and started using the same comfort woman system that Japan had established during the war. Of course, this is false and nowhere in Talmadge’s article does it say this.
Next, is “‘enslaved women’ of World War 2.” Why is “enslaved women” in quotes? The term does not appear in Talmadge’s article. The only location where the word “enslaved” appears at all is in the following graph:
Next we have: “‘Comfort Women’, defined as being a selection of woman forced into prostitution.”
Really? Defined by whom?
A look at Talmadge’s article reveals that the information he presents is much less sensational than the way it is offered up here. In it, we learn (all emphasis mine):
1. The orders [to set up the brothels] from the [Japanese] Ministry of the Interior came on Aug. 18, 1945, one day before a Japanese delegation flew to the Philippines to negotiate the terms of their country’s surrender and occupation.
2. “The comfort women … had some resistance to selling themselves to men who just yesterday were the enemy, and because of differences in language and race, there were a great deal of apprehensions at first. But they were paid highly, and they gradually came to accept their work peacefully.”
3. On Aug. 28, 1945, an advance wave of occupation troops arrived in Atsugi, just south of Tokyo. By nightfall, the troops found the RAA’s first brothel.
4. Amid complaints from military chaplains and concerns that disclosure of the brothels would embarrass the occupation forces back in the U.S., on March 25, 1946, MacArthur placed all brothels, comfort stations and other places of prostitution off limits. The RAA soon collapsed.
5. Though they were free to do so, no Japanese women sought compensation [under a government program].
“Not one Japanese woman has come forward to seek compensation or an apology,” Wada said. “Unless they feel they can say they were completely forced against their will, they feel they cannot come forward.”
Trying to draw some sort of moral equivalency between the Japanese government/military policy of contracting and implementing comfort women stations throughout Asia and a domestic system that was implemented by the Japanese government with U.S. Occupation Force “tacit approval” that lasted only seven months is disingenuous to say the least.
“I think one reason, why comfort women issue became such a big deal, was that Japan had been once an evil empire and LOST the war. The problem is not just about the denials of some Japanese politician
on that issue.”
Well, yes, it seems to be a part of every war.
But there’s a difference between the “Comfort Women” of Korea, who were coerced, and the “Comfort Women” of Japan who were recruited and told of their duties upfront. They aren’t exactly the same thing.
As a woman, I find it all exceptionally gross, but there really is a difference and it’s dangerous to draw a neat parallel.
Mockett-san, thanks for your comment.
My point was NOT to justify anything in the issue. I read that even among all the girls who had been coerced to serve, there were clear classes of them. Japanese girls for officers or upper soldieries and Korean ones for lower soldiers, etc. We are sorry especially for the Korean women who were extremely mishandled. There were so many crimes committed by Japanese military during the war. The problem in Japan in general is that whole the history of these crimes is not enough being taught at school or not thoroughly discussed in the society.
On the contrary whole the history of Japanese war crimes is being taught with exaggeration in Korea or in China. Japan hatred is very common there. We cannot help it. But their problem is that they evade their political problems by insisting Japan Crimes. That what I meant.
Additional comment.
1. clear classes DURING THE WAR. (see #7)
2. Most “Comfort Women of Korea” were initially recruited by Japanese or Korean agency. But these girls were not told exactly what to serve.
3. Most of “Comfort Women of Japan” who were recruited and told of their duties upfront, had probably no other alternatives. They did it only to survive or to feed their family. You cannot simply say they chose it.
From women’s standing point, both cases are sad.
“On the contrary whole the history of Japanese war crimes is being taught with exaggeration in Korea or in China. Japan hatred is very common there. We cannot help it. But their problem is that they evade their political problems by insisting Japan Crimes. That what I meant.
3. Most of “Comfort Women of Japan” who were recruited and told of their duties upfront, had probably no other alternatives. They did it only to survive or to feed their family. You cannot simply say they chose it.”
Gotcha.
War is awful. And, as I’ve said before, it seems to be the women and the children who suffer the most. Thanks for posting.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20070427a1.html
New article appears today on the subject, with a little more information, though the coercion of Japanese women is still “alleged.”
I’m curious to hear from people in Japan what the news there is saying.
I think I’ve recommended this several times here now, but the Yuki Tanaka book, Japan’s Comfort Women looks at the Occupation as well as Japanese run comfort stations (official and unofficial). One of his main points about prostitution in the Occupation is that it is hardly willing–the economic coercion was enormous in a devastated postwar Japan. He also points out that the official disbanding of the RAA was hardly the end of it, although US media outlets on this issue have left that impression. Tanaka’s book was also referenced in the NYTimes article.
What I think has happened here is that the recent issue over the Congress demand for an apology led some reporters to read up on the issue and found out *gasp* the US also participated in a similar way. Now I’m just waiting for the Japanese Diet to demand an apology from the US.
The JCP loves to rabble rouse, I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if they brought it up, either that or some right wingers, who love to argue that bad stuff happens in war and imperialism, so Japan didn’t do anything the West didn’t do.
I was wondering this morning if an American had dug up the news, or if a politically astute Japanese had.
Yes, this is going to get even more interesting.
I’ve missed your recommendation in the past. I’ll add this book to my ever expanding list now. Thank you.
Sorry for my delay on this. Let me first reply to JP’s point.
Yes I would agree that the posting is sensationalist. But I think its a pretty sensational accusation being made by the writer and thus is perfectly in line.
First point I would make is the fact the the RAA existed and no one was punished even though it was dismantled relatively quickly makes that wrong. No Americans have ever been prosecuted or apologized for using those services. But clearly they did. And those men who did should damn well be ashamed of themselves if not punished for doing so.
Second point I would make is that the definition of comfort woman that i wrote is totally accurate. You can debate that if you like. “Recruited by force or deception to serve as “sex slaves” is the common definition. I believe what I wrote is very much in line with that.
Third point it doesn’t matter if the Japanese setup the camps of comfort woman. The American soldiers should have NOT used them. Period! There is no excuse. To say that the Japanese set them up so its not their fault doesn’t fly.
There was as RTN pointed out, correctly in my view, economic coercion for American GI’s to sleep with Japanese women who were desperate for money.
So Mike Honda’s bill from the senate makes very little sense when you look at the above facts. I’m not saying all Americans did this. Not at all.
I’m saying that quite a few of them did. And that should negate ANY demand from the U.S. for an apology if we’re talking about things in a fair and balanced way.
But thats the point isn’t it? The U.S. won and Japan lost. So its not going to be fair and balanced because to the winner go the spoils. But somewhere the concept of RIGHT and WRONG is missing.
“I’m saying that quite a few of them did. And that should negate ANY demand from the U.S. for an apology if we’re talking about things in a fair and balanced way.”
That’s an awfully extreme point of view.
Again, who in history is completely blameless–and has any power to ask for apologies or effect change? And in the meantime, who suffers?
I agree Marie, no one is blameless.
I guess maybe I’m just really sick and tired of American policy makers trying to police the world. When I look at the situation in Japan at the end of the war and add that with Mike Honda in our times asking the Japanese for an apology, when I think the Americans should stay out of it all together… I guess I just think its totally out of line in light of these facts.
I could be wrong, but I think one reason the Americans have pushed this issue is because the South Koreans want it, and we want them to be happy if we are to get anywhere with the 5 party/nation talks. And progress in those talks is important for everyone.
I also think it behooves us as bloggers to be careful about interjecting our own political believes (myself included) in how we interpret and sensationalize material. What is that saying about an ounce of caution . . . ?
JT has some good points about this. When I read it, I was surprised that the story was approved by both the AP and the editors of the papers that published it. The tone, the assertions, the timing, they all add up to another Hogan and Hartson project.
Marie Mockett: What do you mean “the Americans” have pushed this issue? I know a lot of Americans, and most don’t know about this issue, let alone be in a position to ‘push’ it. One man is: Mike Honda. He wants more votes from his constituency. This is picking low fruit on the tree for him. I’m not saying he doesn’t believe in what he’s doing, but there is a political expediency for him.
This piece stinks of well-placed PR placed by lobbyists. The assertion that anything could mitigate Japan’s crimes in WW2 (or any crimes committed at any time, by anyone in history), is absurd.
I meant people within the government. I didn’t mean the population at large. Like I said, I could be wrong. I had assumed this was part of the whole 5 party talks deal–but perhaps it isn’t.
After further reading–it does look like you are quite right and Honda is acting very independently in pushing for the resolution. I had been under the impression that, separate to Honda, an apology on the part of Japan is all part of the 5 party talks.
As a follow up to this discussion, this is rather relevant:
http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/national/news/20070427p2a00m0na009000c.html
JP, while not arguing that they (Japanese and Occupation/US) are equivalent, the system under the Occupation was hardly just prostitution as normal between soldiers and women off base as your initial sarcastic remark makes it sound. I think you’re taking it too lightly.
Some say anti-japanese(pro-chinese) groups among democrats push Mike Honda’s resolution to relativize Japan’s claim of abduction issue. I don’t know if this picture is true, but, in fact, the claims of his resolution resemble those of DRPK, and without doubt Kim will use comfort women issue in the negociation table.
As for Occupation era, this article omit the mass rape that is background of this kind of wrong institutions. Do you know miki sawada’s activity?
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/沢田美喜(in japanese)
I don’t buy Mr. Talmadge because his articles are sometimes biased and inaccurate. I wonder why he reports this in this timing(Abe’s visit to Washington).
I’m basically pro-american, and I’m tired of blame games.
Politicizing the history is very dangerous. Leave the history to historians.
Most of “Comfort Women of Japan” who were recruited and told of their duties upfront, had probably no other alternatives. They did it only to survive or to feed their family. You cannot simply say they chose it.
And I am sure you could probably say the same thing about all prostitutes since the beginning of time.
No argument there. But we need to be clear as to who was a wiling participant and who was not.
The article makes a vague association, not even directly, of the word ‘coercion’ with this brothel system. It offers no evidence, no testimony, nothing that could stand up in a court, and no leads in that direction. This is a PR piece, plain and simple. Japan is working hard on its image and it can influence the US press, it has done so in the past and it will do so in the future. That’s all this is.
No Americans have ever been prosecuted or apologized for using those services. But clearly they did.
Has anyone sued for damages? Has anyone tried to bring charges? Who is the aggrieved party? If someone comes forth and sues or demands compensation, then we can judge the U.S. government on the merits of its response. Until then, it is rather difficult to understand what is your point.
And those men who did should damn well be ashamed of themselves if not punished for doing so.
How shall we track them down? And how exactly should they be punished?
“Recruited by force or deception to serve as “sex slaves” is the common definition.
I don’t know what else to say here except you are simply wrong on this point.
Third point it doesn’t matter if the Japanese setup the camps of comfort woman.
It makes all the difference in the world.
If your re-read my comment, you will see that I condoned neither the “tacit approval” of the GHQ nor the existence of the brothels. What I said was, “Trying to draw some sort of moral equivalency between the Japanese government/military policy of contracting and implementing comfort women stations throughout Asia and a domestic system that was implemented by the Japanese government with U.S. Occupation Force “tacit approval” that lasted only seven months is disingenuous to say the least.”
The American soldiers should have NOT used them. Period! There is no excuse.
OK. And. . .
To say that the Japanese set them up so its not their fault doesn’t fly.
I didn’t say that.
There was as RTN pointed out, correctly in my view, economic coercion for American GI’s to sleep with Japanese women who were desperate for money.
Economic coercion is almost always a major if not the main factor when any person exploits another. . . both legally and illegally.
So Mike Honda’s bill from the senate makes very little sense when you look at the above facts. I’m not saying all Americans did this. Not at all.
I think that Mike Honda is a jackass and the U.S. Congress is a bunch of clowns. That does not, however, have anything to do with the logic of the arguments being presented by you or me.
But thats the point isn’t it? The U.S. won and Japan lost. So its not going to be fair and balanced because to the winner go the spoils.
Is that what you think? It’s not what I think
Ken, I can certainly see where your point is true. There isn’t anything that would as you say would stand up in court. Its totally possible that the article is totally a PR drop as you say.
Never the less, I think there is enough there to at least make the Mike Honda’s of the world think twice before jumping into the middle of this very serious but complex issue.
Ed, there is a precedent in Japan as you know that Japanese people sue the Japanese government for American wrong doings. I’m not an expert on the issue, but I can think of at least two rape cases in recent times where families turned around and sued the Japanese government. We even posted about that story here on Japundit. In respect to suing for comfort women, I don’t know if anyone has every sued for such a thing. But its a good question.
I’m not sure its a case of tracking people down at this point more then it is realizing like Marie said that who in history is completely blameless? Mike Honda sure seems to think the Americans are blameless.. So much so that they can pass judgment on the issue. And that’s really my entire point on this issue.
And I agree with you that that Mike Honda sure seems like a jackass. Are the U.S. Congress a bunch of clowns? I really don’t know. But if they are anything like Canadians or Japanese, then yeah there’s probably a good deal of wankers there.
As to the spoils of war comment I make, interesting that we have such different points of view on this.
I have to say though it really is what I think in this regard.
I hope I don’t sound Anti-American, because that is not my intention. I just really don’t think Mr. Honda has any business asking for apologies from the Japanese when American forces have a less then perfect track record. Hopefully that came through.
It would be nice if we could ask Eric Talmadge to grace us with his presence to answer a few questions. I know I have at least a couple.
Thanks for posting, zzz(Your name is funny). “As for Occupation era, this article omit the mass rape that is background of this kind of wrong institutions.” It’s very true. I had read it, too.
I would like to inform you guys there was also mass rape going on in former east Germany by Russian and other troops just after the war. I heard it from several old German persons. But the world doesn’t know about that. Germany once had been an evil rich and lose the war, is one reason, I think.
“As for Occupation era, this article omit the mass rape that is background of this kind of wrong institutions.” It’s very true. I had read it, too.
Mass rape in Japan? By Occupation forces?
Where did you read it? Please let us know so we also can read it for ourselves.
(I tried GOOGLE-ing “mass rape” Japan occupation, but ended up getting mostly reports on Japan’s actions in Nanking during its occupation and a few links concerning the RAA.)
Add to that, there was also a mass rape by Russian Troops in Manchu (former Japan territory in north east China) just after the defeat of Japan. It’s more famous in Japan than the rape and violence in Nanking by Japan Troops which is well known to the world. Most soldiers were under presser about life and death, that is the psychological background of their act. War is awful.
JP, I read it in Japanese Language on a history book by a Japanese historian. It should have been some rapes going on at that time in Japan, for sure. But was that such a mass rape or not, I cannot judge. As I described on comment #29 No Wonder even if US occupation forces did it. I think those young soldiers should have been very stressed for early stretch in Japan.
“I hope I don’t sound Anti-American, because that is not my intention. I just really don’t think Mr. Honda has any business asking for apologies from the Japanese when American forces have a less then perfect track record. Hopefully that came through.”
Mr. Honda hardly thinks of America as having a blameless record in history. Look at his whole appeal to the Muslim population in the States; he made this appeal based on the Japanese-American internment experience during WW2, an incredibly shameful period in US history. He’s obviously conscious of the history of his own country.
Is he a clown? That’s another subject, but I would not jump to the conclusion that he is the archetypal “American who thinks he’s blameless.” That’s a simplistic take on why he is doing what he is doing, though I can see how it has its simple emotional appeal for some. I note, for example, that you use the phrase “the Mike Honda’s (sic) of the world” as though he stands for something immediately recognizable. And yet, I don’t think you’ve researched him enough to know who he is and what his role is in the American government to hold him up as some sort of archetype . . . except that . . .
you said pretty clearly that you are “tired of America policing the world.” I think that was clear enough as to your main impetus in writing the post and pitching it as you did. You’ve jumped to an emotional conclusion based on your own personal biases without researching the subject more deeply and reflecting on it in a thoughtful way.
Zzz, would that we could just leave history to the historians . . . and trust that they would teach us fairly. That would be a world I would enjoy.
This is my personal opinion. There was a propaganda or a bad rumor in Japan just before and after the surrender, such as young Japanese girls were going to be raped (and young men were going to be killed) when US troops would come.
When actually some rapes occurred, Japanese government started thinking about taking some measures against that. Officials were very afraid of emerging some conflicts with occupation soldiers.
It was the political atmosphere that could affect for decision making of providing brothels under the auspices of the Recreation and Amusement Association, which was operated with government funds, for US Occupation force.
TofuUnion, I think your personal opinion is probably correct. The WWII era was such a very different time from what we know now.
Alex,
First of all, in no way, shape or form does Mike Honda think America is blameless in history. I’m not sure what gave you that idea. Check out the man and what he’s done and the legislation he’s introduced.
I’m not sure its a case of tracking people down at this point more then it is realizing like Marie said that who in history is completely blameless?
This is irrelevant and you know it. It doesn’t matter what crime has been committed elsewhere by someone else, a crime is a crime.
Let’s say an American soldier raped a Japanese woman during the occupation. Does that make a Japanese soldier’s rape of a Burmese woman during the war suddenly ok? Is that the limit of morals, just a scorecard to keep points on? Oh…you guys did bad things too, so we can’t be punished. Bullshit. Punish them both.
I totally agree 100% with you Ken. That was entirely my point by posting the article the way I did and my comments that followed. Sorry if that wasn’t clear but I was trying to say precisely what you said. I think you just said it much better then I. No crime is ok by any side, winner or looser, in a war. Thanks for making it a bit clearer.
I’ll look into Mike Honda’s background further. My judgment is based only on what I’ve read in the news over the course of the year so if there is suggestion that I may be wrong in the way I see the man, I’ll look into that.
“That was entirely my point by posting the article the way I did and my comments that followed. Sorry if that wasn’t clear but I was trying to say precisely what you said. I think you just said it much better then I.”
Dude, that’s not what you said. Go back and read your own comments. What you said was that the US had no right to push for a resolution because it doesn’t have a blameless past and that you are tired of the US policing the world. Go check your words. You didn’t say, “Everyone should be punished.” Maybe as a result of this discussion, you’ve come to believe this. But that’s separate than saying, “That’s what I meant.”
“This is my personal opinion. There was a propaganda or a bad rumor in Japan just before and after the surrender, such as young Japanese girls were going to be raped (and young men were going to be killed) when US troops would come.
When actually some rapes occurred, Japanese government started thinking about taking some measures against that. Officials were very afraid of emerging some conflicts with occupation soldiers.”
I meant to respond to you TofuUnion, but just got too tired last night. I’ve heard this opinion voiced more than once, and am pretty sure I’ve read it elsewhere. I suspect it’s close to what actually happened during those dark days.
Marie, I said multiple things but we’ve touched on multiple points none of which contradict each other. Seriously, read the original post. I said if the article was found to be true then American policy in respect to asking for an apology would be flipped on its ear. I ALSO said in the SAME post that Americans would be guilty of a crime clearly meaning that both the Japanese and Americans who took advantage of comfort women should be punished.
I think that is VERY clear. I did say that if this information was true that the US has no right to pass a resolution of the sort. How does that contradict anything that I’ve said? Can someone not have multiple points? Gimmie a break…
-Dude
Of course you can have multiple points. You can also have a point of view that changes over time (certainly I have). But you can’t contradict yourself, then pretend that it was all a misunderstanding when you suddenly come under pressure to defend yourself. Just . . . defend yourself. Don’t back-track and say, “Oh. I didn’t mean that” just because things become uncomfortable. It’s intellectually dishonest, especially for a site like Japundit that’s always been (okay, most of the time), smart and a great supplement to traditional news sources.
Let’s look at the comments.
Here’s Ken’s point:
“Let’s say an American soldier raped a Japanese woman during the occupation. Does that make a Japanese soldier’s rape of a Burmese woman during the war suddenly ok? Is that the limit of morals, just a scorecard to keep points on? Oh…you guys did bad things too, so we can’t be punished. Bullshit. Punish them both.”
Ken says everyone should be punished. You then write:
“That was entirely my point by posting the article the way I did and my comments that followed. Sorry if that wasn’t clear but I was trying to say precisely what you said. I think you just said it much better then I.”
But that’s NOT your entire point. You didn’t post this because you just wanted everyone punished. You also wrote:
“I guess maybe I’m just really sick and tired of American policy makers trying to police the world. When I look at the situation in Japan at the end of the way and add that with Mike Honda in our times asking the Japanese for an apology, when I think the Americans should stay out of it all together.”
IOW, you want the Americans to completely stay out of the topic. That’s what you really want. You aren’t initially asking for the punishment of both parties. You are asking for the American, Mike Honda, to stay out of the subject altogether because he doesn’t deserve to comment on it.
“I’m saying that quite a few of them did. And that should negate ANY demand from the U.S. for an apology if we’re talking about things in a fair and balanced way.”
Essentially restates what I pointed out.
“But thats (sic) the point isn’t it? The U.S. won and Japan lost. So its (sic) not going to be fair and balanced because to the winner go the spoils. But somewhere the concept of RIGHT and WRONG is missing.”
And here we get to the heart of what you feel. The US “won,” in your eyes, and Japan “lost,” and this is why the US still gets to police the world.
You aren’t just trying to restate what Ken said; you added to his original point which is not only should the US own up to taking advantage of the comfort women provided by the Japanese, but that, having taken advantage of them, they have no right to now ask or push for an apology. In other words, there are two parts to your point. You aren’t just re-stating what Ken said.
And I think the fact that you feel so emotional about this issue has colored your thinking, and kept you from investigating it further to present us with a well thought out observation. If you hadn’t just reacted to the news story, but had instead done some digging to learn who Mike Honda is, to actually sit down and read the John Dower book or any other reputable historian who covered the period, then you wouldn’t have pitched your original article as “evidence” that supports your emotional claim.
From your original post:
“Not to mention the fact that American GI’s would be guilty of rape and soliciting prostitution.”
At what point in your original post did you call for punishment? What you stated was that Mike Honda’s resolution would turn matters “on its ear.” I see no mention of needing punishment until comment 13, after JP started to question your intentional sensationalizing of a news story.
Speaking of sensationalizing . . .
It’s insincere, for example to have put ‘enslaved women’ of World War 2 had setup ‘Comfort Stations’ in quotes. Ditto for the quotes in your title. You were trying to draw a clear parallel between the Comfort Women of Korea and those of Japan. Why would you do this when the facts don’t completely support a parallel conclusion?
Later, toward the end of the discussion, you shift position and claim that you only want the American solidiers to be “punished.” (taking us back to the top of my post)..
You write:
“Second point I would make is that the definition of comfort woman that i wrote is totally accurate. You can debate that if you like. “Recruited by force or deception to serve as “sex slaves” is the common definition. I believe what I wrote is very much in line with that.”
This, again, is intellectually lazy and dishonest. We’ve given you plenty of evidence questioning the notion that the Japanese women were “recruited by force or deception” (your words). Many have pointed out that economic harshness was most likely the strongest contributing factor. But you haven’t addressed this, or retracted your original definition of “comfort women.”
Why? Again, because I think the definition as you want to see it suits your agenda. But it doesn’t take into consideration the information that a number of posters have provided to you. And I think if you have an agenda or a point of view behind everything that’s written, you should state what it is, not backtrack and make nice with posters by saying, “Oh. That’s what I meant. But you said it more clearly.” Your posts don’t add up to just “meaning what Ken said.” You meant something more and I think you should be honest about it.
For the record, here’s what I think.
I don’t understand why Mike Honda is doing what he’s doing. There’s something to the story that’s missing. He represents a portion of Silicon Valley, but I’m unclear as to how that connects to Korea or China (though I’m sure someone will enlighten me). I think the real story has yet to be told.
Ok. I should have not written =entirely=…
Is that really the best you have here? Other then that one word, I have not contradicted myself and I simply do not see where I shifted my argument. Its the same. I shifted focus on another element not my argument or my position.
This, again, is intellectually lazy and dishonest. We’ve given you plenty of evidence questioning the notion that the Japanese women were “recruited by force or deception”
Yes I see a lot of points of view here. But you haven’t convinced me that what I said is incorrect. I agree with some elements of whats being said. And I believe I have also stated where I agree and where I don’t. I believe the way I wrote it is perfectly accurate and sorry but I’m not at all convinced that the definition I put up is incorrect. Not sure what else to say about that.
because I think the definition as you want to see it suits your agenda
Oh I see.. finally it comes down to a secret agenda does it? ha ha… I’m at a loss for words… So that’s what all this is about is it? Wow. Ok I have an agenda now? And what would that be? You certainly seem to focus a lot on what I have to say instead of the article at hand so you must see something that I don’t… I don’t agree with you Marie or the “evidence” you’ve brought to the table to convince me that I am wrong on this point. (Do you really wanna get into it over the use of my quotes now?) ha ha …
Agenda? That’s just laughable. I’m not sure what your expecting but its almost as if you want me to see things your way when I don’t… And because of that I have a secret agenda… ha ha …
“Second point I would make is that the definition of comfort woman that i wrote is totally accurate. You can debate that if you like. “Recruited by force or deception to serve as “sex slaves” is the common definition. I believe what I wrote is very much in line with that.”
Show me proof that they were “recruited by force or deception” in Japan.
You can’t.
And yet you’ve left the post up there. Why is that, Alex? You have evidence to the contray, and yet you’ve left the post as it is? Why would you do that, except that you want to continue to leave the impression you first made?
As you said you are “tired of America policing the world.”
Still can’t see what you’ve said?
Evidence? Ok try THIS to start:
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n5p25_secret.html
“Rape was so prevalent in the months following US subjugation of the island that most Okinawans over age 65 either know or have heard of a woman who was raped in the aftermath of the war”
Lets go with number two:
http://www.counterpunch.org/drayton05102005.html
This article takes a look at American behavior in Europe.
No evidence you say? Ok here we go:
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70B11F63E580C728CDDAF0894D8404482&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fW%2fWorld%20War%20II%20%281939%2d45%29
This article from the New York times also talks about widespread rape by Americans in Okinawa. You have to have a subscription though but I’m trying to find the full article re-printed.
None of this proves recruitment by force or deception. But it does prove that there is a case that Americans did some seriously bad shit during the occupation. Of course this could be all lies and part of a giant hidden agenda…
“None of this proves recruitment by force or deception.”
Again, why won’t you change your original post which claims that women were “coerced” to be comfort women since, by your own admission, you’ve failed to find proof.
Why? Because, as you wrote: “it does prove that there is a case that Americans did some seriously bad shit during the occupation.”
You are conflating two things together in an illogical manner, based on your own emotional respose. This is irresponsible and not the kind of thing we have done in the past on Japundit. When one of us has made a mistake–as I’ve done–we admit it.
A bit off-topic, but in reading a Wikipedia article on Mike Honda, I came across this interesting passage:
“The congressman remembered what he and specially his parents had to go through when Pearl Harbor was attacked. “We were taken in a vehicle with windows covered, we had no idea where we were being taken.” Because of that episode in his life the congressman explained that he understood what the Muslims could be going through in America, after the attack on September 11th.”
The strange thing is, Mr. Honda was born on June 27, 1941. I somehow doubt that he retains any memory of anything that happened in his life during the war years.
You know, it’s funny, but my mother swears she remembers American attacks in Japan, but she would have been a toddler. To this day, she’s scared when an airplane flies too low. War seems to make an impression.
If he was born in 1941, then he would have grown up in “camp” and could remember some of that indignity. I don’t know. I know Japanese-Americans who were interned and it’s a really, really touchy subject for them and even for their descendants. Not a shining moment in US history.
Again, why won’t you change your original post which claims that women were “coerced,” since, by your own admission, you’ve failed to find proof.
Coerced? As far as I can tell, I’ve only used the word “Coerced” once:
Post #13: There was as RTN pointed out, correctly in my view, economic coercion for American GI’s to sleep with Japanese women who were desperate for money.
So lets leave that be for now.
If I make a mistake, I say it. In fact you were yelling above about me backtracking because I said sorry (which I proved that it was NOT backtracking actually). So once you were proven wrong on that, you decided to go at me with a ‘Hidden Agenda’. Since that’s clearly not the case, your now asking me to apologies for something that needs no apology because you have no leg to stand on here.
And thank you very much for the psychological assessment by the way. But lets leave that to professionals shall we?
Sure its an emotional response. But its a reasonable one. This is a complex issue with many facets and it is YOU who are confusing people such as me talking about different branches as talking about the entire tree. I will not backdown here, because its you who are in the wrong Marie.
“Second point I would make is that the definition of comfort woman that i wrote is totally accurate. You can debate that if you like. “Recruited by force or deception to serve as “sex slaves” is the common definition. I believe what I wrote is very much in line with that.
Coercion. Again, where is the proof that this definition is accurate?
You are all over the map Alex. Let me recap.
1. Americans took advantage of comfort women according to your original post. You added some quotation marks and implied that the comfort women in the Japanese camps were the same as the Koreans.
2. You admitted that the main reason you wrote is because you are tired of Americans policing the world.
3. You refuse to back down from your sensationalising and distorting of “comfort women.”
4. You state that you aren’t really anti-American (which contradicts point 2).
5. You try to say that the whole point of your post was to say that everyone should be punished.
You are all over the map.
Since when has being tired of Americans policing the world make me Anti-American? So does being against the war in Iraq also make me anti-American?
Yes indeed lets recap:
1.) By adding quotations, you took my meaning as implying that Japanese were in the same camp as Korean women. I never said that. That was YOUR assumption.
2.) Yes I am tired of Americans policing the world, but I wrote the article because its news. I do happen to feel rather tired of America trying to rule the world. And somehow I don’t think I’m alone on this.
3.) Indeed my definition of comfort women is accurate. Please look up Wikipedia and compare. I did and I am correct on this. And I admitted that it was a sensationalist topic didn’t i? So what? What does that have to do with anything??
4.) I am not Anti-American at all. Disagreeing with Americans policing the world doesn’t make me anti American marie, thats complete crap on your part and you know it.
5.) I did apologies for using the word ‘entirely’, the world that seems to have thrown you for a loop for whatever reason. I didn’t say everyone should be punished, I said any guilty parties (Japanese and American should be).
Once again, your attacking me and yet your not making any sense at all. Your absolutly wrong and whats worse the more you post the lamer your argument is getting.
From hidden agendas to being all over the map… Give it up gal…
“Indeed my definition of comfort women is accurate. Please look up Wikipedia and compare. I did and I am correct on this. And I admitted that it was a sensationalist topic didn’t i? So what? What does that have to do with anything??”
We are going around in circles here. The way you presented the article implies that the Japanese comfort women were coerced and the same as the Korean women.
I’ve repeatedly asked you to prove that this is the case and you haven’t.
“By adding quotations, you took my meaning as implying that Japanese were in the same camp as Korean women. I never said that. That was YOUR assumption.”
Your quotes, Alex, again:
“Second point I would make is that the definition of comfort woman that i wrote is totally accurate. You can debate that if you like. “Recruited by force or deception to serve as “sex slaves” is the common definition. I believe what I wrote is very much in line with that.”
Ergo, the Japanese women were in the same situation as the Koreans.
And, to requote JP:
“First the title, “GIs frequented Japan’s ‘comfort women,’” which is lifted directly from NJ dot com, and was not used in the paper where I saw this piece. This title suggests that U.S. GIs walked in and started using the same comfort woman system that Japan had established during the war. Of course, this is false and nowhere in Talmadge’s article does it say this.”
He, also, read your piece the same way that I did.
“And I admitted that it was a sensationalist topic didn’t i? So what? What does that have to do with anything??”
Because we try to be an intelligent and respected blog, rather than one which conflates issues and responds in a purely emotional manner without some level of research to back up opinions and claims. JP’s original posts have been referenced by news sources because what he writes is smart and insightful. This is a sensational post with sketchy evidence.
And I am bothered by the fact that you are all over the map in your protestations and your points of view. This did not used to happen on this site. Ditto for the typos (which I’ve often gone in and fixed for you).
I have not mentioned Korean women at all so that is your misunderstanding. I think JP’s points were well made but that’s not what you originally started arguing.
JAPUNDIT is a site that anyone and everyone can have an opinion on something in an open way. Whats happened here is that you misunderstood elements of my posts, attacked me for it, and have been proven wrong in a very obvious way. So your backtracking looking for points where you can gain some ground in this conversation.
To prove that, I haven’t made this personal. You have. You’ve called me a sensationalist, bad typing, Anti-American with a hidden agenda who is all over the map.
You’ve got no legs to stand on here Marie. And you know it. Your just slinging mud now and its sad.
I’m gonna go watch hockey. But if you want to continue, I’ll be back on later.
“I have not mentioned Korean women at all so that is your misunderstanding. I think JP’s points were well made but that’s not what you originally started arguing.”
This is not a misunderstanding. I very clearly am saying that you have intentionally allowed for a distortion of information because of your own emotional response to an issue. I am clearly saying that I find this intellectually lazy and dishonest. When asked to back up your claims with clear information, you can’t. You do not want to address the distortion–save for your one use of the word “entirely,” which, yes, I acknowledge you retracted.
“To prove that, I haven’t made this personal.”
“You’ve got no legs to stand on here Marie. And you know it. Your (sic) just slinging mud now and its (sic) sad.”
Nice.
At this point, we should move the discussion to the forum, if you want it to continue.
And I am clearly saying your wrong. You’re absolutly wrong and you know it. You haven’t proven it. Hell you haven’t even come close to proving your argument. You keep asking for references and such and I keep giving them and you just try and find a new direction in which to go and when thats a dead end, you try and find something else.
You’ve even going after the lack of apostrophes in my sentences as what, some way to prove your point?? nice… Lame but at this point I’ve learned that is not beyond you.
You asked for evidence that the story I posted was correct. I posted that in spades. You asked for clarity on the “entirely” word, and the word was retracted.
There is no distortion of the facts and you can call me intellectually lazy and dishonest as much as you like but it just adds to your ridiculous and very incorrect statements.
I have backed up my statements and you’ve gone from one point to another in hoping to find someway to save face here. You keep pushing this issue of inconsistency and I’ve proven that I have been absolutly consistent the entire time. I can’t be blamed if you misunderstand me.
I have no intention of moving this discussion to the form because its clearly not worth the time to do so. You’re wrong, I think a lot of people here see that your wrong and if you want to keep posting your thoughts on the issue here or find a new name to call, then go right ahead. But be sure I’ll defend it at the risk of making you look ridiculous in the process.
You did over look one point though. Though there is no secret agenda… Maybe its a giant conspiracy!! Ha ha ha … Just throwing one out there for you… Hope it helps.
They may, or may not. Don’t make assumptions though.
Thanks for point that out Overoften. Your right.
“You keep asking for references and such and I keep giving them and you just try and find a new direction.”
The last time you added a reference, you said, “None of this proves recruitment by force or deception.” And that was what I challenged you to prove. Which you still haven’t.
“But be sure I’ll defend it at the risk of making you look ridiculous in the process.”
This isn’t about me looking ridiculous. This is about asking you to, again, please put up some references which bolster your claim.
Once again, I challenge you to do so. Because until then I maintain, as I said from the start, that you have distorted information because, in your own words, you are “tired of America policing the world.”
From the Australian:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21624981-2703,00.html
“Kaburagi said the sudden demand forced brothel operators to advertise for women who were not licensed prostitutes. Natsue Takita, a 19-year-old Komachien worker whose relatives had been killed in the war, responded to an ad seeking an office worker. She was told that the only positions available were for comfort women and was persuaded to accept the offer.
According to Kaburagi’s memoirs, published in Japanese after the occupation ended in 1952, she jumped in front of a train a few days after the brothel started operations.”
Persuaded to accept the offer. Well she wasn’t persuaded by Santa Clause now was she?
Does that sound like someone who WANTS TO BE A PROSTITUTE?? That sounds like someone who is desperate and American G.I’s took advantage of that. That is CLEAR PROOF in my mind! But lets look at more from that same article:
“The worst victims … were the women who, with no previous experience, answered the ads calling for ‘Women of the New Japan’,” Kaburagi wrote.“The comfort women … had some resistance to selling themselves to men who just yesterday were the enemy, and because of differences in language and race, there were a great deal of apprehensions at first. But they were paid highly, and they gradually came to accept their work peacefully.”
Now here is more from the Chicago Tribune. The headline is: U.S. let Japanese coerce ‘comfort women’ for GI’s.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0704250988apr26,1,5586623.story?coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true
More then even that, why do you think the RAA was setup in the first place?
I trust you will now apologies.
Wait, here is more evidence specifically for what you asked for:
“Sadly, we police had to set up sexual comfort stations for the occupation troops,” recounts the official history of the Ibaraki Prefectural Police Department, whose jurisdiction is just northeast of Tokyo. “The strategy was, through the special work of experienced women, to create a breakwater to protect regular women and girls.”
We police HAD TO set up sexual comfort stations. Does that sound like a choice???
http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/features/news/20070426p2g00m0fe037000c.html
Not that I really want to get involved in this, but…
Citing Wikipedia as an authoritative source for anything suggests either naievete or desperation. I appreciate Wiki as much as anyone else, a neat source for quick info on things that aren’t important enough to actually research. I’d happily use it to check the date Yellowstone was designated as a national park, for instance. But I think I’d look elsewhere to learn how to adjust the car’s brakes before driving the Bearclaw Pass to get to Yellowstone.
Just my 2.4 yen’s worth.
I will “apologies”? I assume you mean “apologise.”
No, Alex, because what you’ve dug up is pretty much the same information I posted in the very first comment I ever made to respond to your post–including the bit about how conditions were so awful, some women committed suicide. You cite the awful conditions, and regurgitate points that others have made earlier. You don’t prove that the women were gun-to-their-head coerced a-la-Korea.
She was told that the only positions available were for comfort women and was persuaded to accept the offer.
No mention of force or deception.
Try again.
Hold on. Now I’m confused. Were we talking about the coercion of women to become comfort women, or the coercion of police or whoever to set up the comfort stations?
A elder friend of mine told me today that brothels had been made to protect Japanese young women of good or high class families from the rapists.
I was surprised to hear that. It sounds like it had been a ‘ Goodwill ‘ of Japanese government. Oh My Goodness. No way !
I shake my head in wonder.
I’ve given point by point evidence on everything and all your doing now is shaking your head and saying “No its not. No its not.” …
Look if you want to continue denying in light of all the many of facts and references that I have posted than thats fine.
Read between the lines. “Persuaded to accept the offer”… Honestly you’ve got to be kidding me.
Allow me to add this example out there: A woman who is forced into prostitution either by a gun to her head or because otherwise she will have no food and her baby (if she has one) will starve… I submit to you that every time a man puts his penis inside her that, in my definition, that is rape… She is being raped because she is being forced to do something she does not want to do.
You, as usual, totally ignored elements of what I wrote as evidence which are undeniable in your response. The police officer admitting that he HAD to setup the camp? That’s forced. I will assume you don’t know what to say about it therefor just didn’t mention it at all.
Start posting some evidence to back up your claims Marie. I’ve done my share and clearly proven my point. If you can’t, then don’t bother replying because your just wasting my time now.
The police had to set up camp as part of official policy. It is extreme to suggest that because the police officer had to set up the camps that he resorted to “force and intimidation” to find Japanese comfort women. This line of, er, logic would fail in a university paper, a court of law, a basic logic course, or a major news outlet.
As overoften puts it:
“Hold on. Now I’m confused. Were we talking about the coercion of women to become comfort women, or the coercion of police or whoever to set up the comfort stations?”
He’s right. You are conflating what a police officer was forced to do with evidence of a woman forced into sexual servitude. This is the kind of “logic drift” you’ve employed elsewhere which bothers me and which I strongly feel lowers the quality of Japundit.
“Read between the lines. “Persuaded to accept the offer”… Honestly you’ve got to be kidding me.”"
And this is the problem. You have read between the lines and seen what you wanted to see. What does it mean that the woman was “persuaded”? You don’t know. Neither do I. It remains lost in history, and will stay there unless some Japanese woman comes forward, as the Koreans, Chinese and Dutch have, and present oral records of what happened.
Again, in a court of law, a university, a logic course or a reputable news source, your “evidence” would not hold up.
So, again, please present evidence. Because until then, your post still reads like the work of someone who has intentionally sensationalized and twisted information out of a personal and emotional need. What’s alarming is that you can’t even see what you’ve done.
“You need to say sorry for that Marie right now”
This Marie does not say sorry for that Marie, and it is unlikely that either of us will be apologizing any time soon, as you have still failed to post logical, persuasive and conclusive evidence.
There were more than a few rapes. Tanaka comes up with a bunch of evidence and examples in his book.
When you’ve got hundreds of thousands of soldiers occupying a country and they believe the inhabitants aren’t quite human or aren’t worthy of respect, very bad things will happen. On the one hand, I’m horrified by what they did and think the US needs to face up to their (our) own skeletons in the closet (even if bad things always happen in war and occupation, that doesn’t make it right). On the other hand, things could have been much much worse (massacres, mass rapes, etc. etc.). The US averted mass starvation by shipping tons of food to Japan…at a time the US public wished we’d have either killed all Japanese or at least dropped more nukes on them.
The comments on this article have been closed by JP.