Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

It listed the price, and locations and said: gaikokujin-ka.
外国人可

Kind of telling, I thought, about the general situation here. One of the selling (renting?) points is that they will accept foreigners. It kind of suggests that many other places don’t.

If I can figure out a way of posting it here I will.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

To go further, why are there so many crimes when criminal activities are illegal?

IMO, laws or lack of it has very little to do with the problem.

DC asks “Japanese person to work in Roppongi Bar’ (or even ‘Blonde blue-eyed English teacher wanted’? Well. To answer simply, it’s what the customer wants. If a U.S. strip club owner posts an ad that saids “Dancers wanted!”, do you think the owner is going to hire a 50 year old woman former professional dancer even though she could dance her butt off? Probably not. Is it age discrimination? Sure it is. But in reality, that woman would simply not apply and if she did, I doubt she’ll take her case to court.
Employers from any country hire or discrimminate based on age, race, and sex. The only difference I see is that there are those who do it discretely while the other doesn’t.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Are you serious?

Rate this comment: 0  0

Now, if there was someplace to go to file a complaint, and then an agency would take over and file suit on the consumer’s behalf, that combined with stiff penalties would in all probability actually do something about the situation.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

A classic bit of toothless law if ever there was one….
Perhaps the counter argument is that women were never allowed to do the same jobs as men….

Rate this comment: 0  0

The real reason the law is toothless is because too few people are really upset about it.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Two reasons. Or Three.
1. If it can be done for licences it can be done for visas.
2. Saves a lot of hassle, for the state as well (surely it’s easier to send out a postcard than interrogate someone?)
3. The state requires we have them. Let them do a bit of work as well.

Rate this comment: 0  0

>They are paid equally for the same job. I know. The income disparity between sexes is hardly unique to Japan.

Maybe not unique, but in Japan it’s *blatant* – because there are no laws against it, except the constitution – which has to invoked in an expensive and time-consuming lawsuit.

I am almost certain that there are specific gender discrimination laws in Japan. The Japanese Equal Employment Opportunity Law of 1986 would be one of them:

IN April 1986, the Japanese Equal Em­
ployment Opportunity (EEO) Law of
1985 went into effect. This law prohibits
gender discrimination with respect to
vocational training, fringe benefits, retire­
ment, and dismissal. It also urges firms to
try to equalize opportunity with regard to
recruitment, hiring, job assignment, and
promotion. It is too early to attempt to
assess the effects of this law. -Source

Interestingly, the source link says that law was passed because Japan wanted to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Elimi­nation of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. I guess in that case, the constitution and other laws were not seen as sufficient, but in the case of the UN racial discrimination conventions, Japanese lawmakers view the constitution as enough.

Edit: That link also states “discrimination against women with respect to wages has been prohibited by the Japanese Labor Standards Law since 1947″

Rate this comment: 0  0

Unfortunately, my Japanese g/friend, who is an architect, has been asked this by three prospective employers in the last month. And her friends say they have the same experience.

>They are paid equally for the same job. I know. The income disparity between sexes is hardly unique to Japan.

Maybe not unique, but in Japan it’s *blatant* – because there are no laws against it, except the constitution – which has to invoked in an expensive and time-consuming lawsuit.

>If you think you or your friend is discriminated, you or your friend can file lawsuit.

Again, the same civil ‘lawsuit’ argument. Civil lawsuits don’t stop other employers discriminating, or even the same employer discriminating a second time. A *law* is required for this.

Rate this comment: 0  0

“Why are they (women) paid less?”

They are paid equally for the same job. I know. The income disparity between sexes is hardly unique to Japan.

“Why was my local kisaten *which is next to a koban* able to post the ad ‘Staff wanted: Japanese Woman, under 40″ in its window (an ad which would be illegal 3 times over in most countries.)”

At least, such ad is not illegal in the US, since small shops are exempt from equal employment acts.

If you think you or your friend is discriminated, you or your friend can file lawsuit.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Head hunters currently use a shokumu-style resume (emphasis on work experience), and I really think that bigger companies need to start converting to this style as well.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Why is discrimination so widespread in US, UK, etc?

Because, just as in Japan, some people in those societies are racist, which is why (IMO) effective laws need to be in place (and enforced) to protect victims, provide for effective redress and emphasise to all that such behaviour is considered unacceptable in modern society.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

You must file your complaint within one year of the incident. HUD(the federal Department of Housing and Urban development) will look into your allegation. If it feels that there has been a violation of the FHA, it will try to negotiate a conciliation agreement with the violator. …If the negotiations are unsuccessful, an administrative hearing will be held before a judge—you will be represented by a HUD attorney.

I think applying criminal law is too harsh just as the U.S. think the civil procedure (with committee’s help) is sufficient..

And according to the U.S. housing act

Act does not prohibit discrimination based solely on a person’s citizenship status

I think Japan need not follow the U.S. example in this regard.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Then why is discrimination based on race, nationality, sex, age etc so widespread in Japan?

Why is discrimination so widespread in US, UK, etc?

in reality the law is next to useless in preventing discrimination and the J-Gov is doing Sweet FA to deal with it.

Kevin was right.

Comment by Kevin
2008-08-27 21:19:13

It doesn’t really matter if a law is made. The same people will come jumping out of the woodwork to say that Japanese people are racist at heart and won’t enforce it, anyway. Then, where will that leave us?

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

The laws against discrimination have all already been established. However, it seems that you want one law that encompasses all the existing laws and then adds penalties in addition to clearly established actions for enforcing the law. I think all of us would agree that this is what we need in Japan.

However, saying that laws against discrimination in Japan don’t exist is a fallacy, and that is where the point of contention is coming from.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

I stated was there are civil codes in place “for remedy.”

Rate this comment: 0  0

Article 100 of Japanese Constitution is a transition rule. When the new constitution came into power in Japan, the government needed to change substantial number of laws to comply with the constitution. Paragraph 2 of Article 100 says such reform acts may be enacted before the new Constitution came into power.

Read the article again.
“The enactment of such laws that are necessary for the enactment of this Constitution may be executed before the day prescribed in the preceding paragraph.”

It does not mean or imply the Constitution is powerless without laws.

There are group of lawyers who argue that the power of the Constitution is limited to the public sector and that a law is required to regulate the private sector. But their argument has nothing to do with article 100 of the Constitution.

Rate this comment: 0  0

In what sense there is no anti-discrimination law in Japan?—only in Jonh K’s sense?

Not sure why you bring up the US, that was raised by others, not by me.

To repeat, to clarify your meaning of anti-discrimination law.

Rate this comment: 0  0

The fear of forgetting to renew…. If it’s so easy to send licence reminders, why not visa reminders?

This matter was the first time I started to get disillusioned with Debito. He’d posted on the Community mailing list a story like the above about someone forgetting by a day to renew, and a few people indirectly and I directly said to him that why, with his contacts in higher places, does he not take up the issue of reminders? We get licence and gaijin card reminders, but not visas, yet nothing really bad happens if you forget to renew the first two.

He ignored the posts.

PS: I wonder if the talk of centralising gaijin card info and linking with visas means that Immigration will now directly know where we live, in a good sense.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Existing laws need to be given teeth, and they need to be enforced as criminal offenses. If someone gets turned away by a landlord because they aren’t Japanese, then the existing laws need to be used by the police and prosecutors to charge the landlord and hold them accountable

I think the police involvement is too harsh.
Here is how the US housing act works.

You must file your complaint within one year of the incident. HUD(the federal Department of Housing and Urban development) will look into your allegation. If it feels that there has been a violation of the FHA, it will try to negotiate a conciliation agreement with the violator. …If the negotiations are unsuccessful, an administrative hearing will be held before a judge—you will be represented by a HUD attorney.

It might be good idea to give penalty, though.

Though Japan does not have to follow suit, keep in mind this U.S. act does not protect foreigners equally.

Rate this comment: 0  0

With regard to the refusals, it seems that the signs
banning foreigners posted at the entrance of Yunohana evince
discrimination based on nationality. But there are situations,
such as in the second refusal, when one cannot differentiate
national origin from physical appearance; Arudou was refused
even after taking Japanese nationality. The substantive issue is
not discrimination based on nationality, but whether one
appears to be foreign. This is discrimination based on race,
skin color, descent, ethnic origin or racial origin. In light of the
meaning of Article 14(1) of the Constitution, Article 26 of the　ICCPR, and CERD, these amount to private acts of racial
discrimination that ought to be eliminated.

http://www.hawaii.edu/aplpj/articles/APLPJ_09.2_webster.pdf

The constituion 14 is at work here.

As a side note, notice the decision was made not because Debito he was Japanese.

Rate this comment: 0  0

No. Those are your words. There are civil codes in place for remedy.

What I’m arguing is about is your statement that there is no Anti-discrimmination law in Japan as if there is such a law that encompasses all discrimination in U.S.

Rate this comment: 0  0

1. Existing laws need to be given teeth, and they need to be enforced as criminal offenses. If someone gets turned away by a landlord because they aren’t Japanese, then the existing laws need to be used by the police and prosecutors to charge the landlord and hold them accountable. And the penalties need to be steep. Slaps on the wrist won’t do it.

I think this is really the heart of the matter. Those people complaining about a lack of laws regarding discrimination probably want to know that someone will be punished for discriminating against someone else.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Oh damn, sorry, I forgot we’re in the 21st Century now, and “being responsible for your own actions” fell out of vogue back in the ’80s….

Rate this comment: 0  0

If you are not a citizen you cannot legally be discriminated against based on nationality
*in housing
*in hotel accomodation
*in employment
*in receiving public services for the locality you live in

That seems to pretty much cover everything needed for daily life, and yet some people apparently want “more” and complain Japan does not have an overall law against “discrimination”. What exactly do folks want that law to say? “No business or store can refuse service to anyone for any reason?” Two thoughts:
1. Is there currently a problem with stores refusing service to people based on their being “gaijin”? Not “has it happened”, because as seen above it has, but is it a big enough or widespread enough problem that we need to legislate against it? From my experience, no. Some old guy at a shop gets cranky and says “I don’t want to serve gaijin” – fine, I’ll take my business elsewhere. But then again, I have never, ever, been in that situation. No-one has ever refused my money, and if they didn’t like the gaijin in the shop then they were certainly civil enough to keep their mouths shut and not let on.
2. Do people really want to live in a socialist nanny state where the State tells businesses they must always serve everyone who shows up at their doors, regardless? That is what any such law would have to say, in effect. So in order to protect the gaijin from their own insecurities that they might be (not “are being”, but might be) discriminated against by someone, somewhere, now McDonald’s has to let every unwashed and stinking to high heaven homeless person in from the cold or heat. Well, that will be good for business! Businesses have a right to serve or not serve anyone they see fit. That is a basic principle of a free market. If they discriminate to the point that their actions are socially unacceptable the market will deal with that as customers turn away and the business loses money.

Or is it that there should be some sort of overarching law making any sort of “discrimination” against anyone anywhere illegal? So when the kid across the aisle makes a face at the gaijin on the train you can call the cops and get him and his mother hauled away? Or some grandmother who last learned a new trick during the Occupation smailes and calls you “gaijin-san” and Bam! Out come the anti-discrimination thought police to send her off to re-education? Please, give me a break. You cannot legislate what people think, as a matter of fact I seem to recall there was a war fought (in part) to remove a Japanese government that was basically doing just that.

Hate speech laws? Oh, those have proven to be trouble-free (sarcasm). Everyplace I am aware of where those exist is now dealing with problems caused by ever-widening definitions of what constitutes “hate speech” as each little group tries to get its pet peeve declared as such. At the end of the day everyone is wandering around looking over their shoulders afraid to say anything at all for fear of upsetting someone seeking to be offended.

No what needs to be done is:
1. Existing laws need to be given teeth, and they need to be enforced as criminal offenses. If someone gets turned away by a landlord because they aren’t Japanese, then the existing laws need to be used by the police and prosecutors to charge the landlord and hold them accountable. And the penalties need to be steep. Slaps on the wrist won’t do it.

2. Signs that say “Japanese only” or “no foreigners” need to be puled down. This could probably be done under existing laws or interpretations of the Constitution. If the businesses (bars, hostess clubs etc.) in question choose to continue to not allow foreigners then they’ll have to find some other way to do it – bouncers only allowing certain people in (without saying “we only let Japanese in here”) or become members-or-invitation-only establishments.

3. A whole lot of people need to grow thicker skins. And learn whereof they speak. There is a whole lot of “Japan has no laws, foreigners have no rights” when neither is true – there are laws, and foreigners have rights. Ignorance of what those laws and rights are is not proof that they do not exist.

The onus of adapting is on the immigrants. Those of us who actually live in Japan chose to come here and choose to continue to do so. I’ll say this here, I’ll say it to immigrants to my country of birth, I’ll say it anywhere: don’t like it here? Fine, don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Not to diss on your problems 4 years ago Eric, but you actually were literally a criminal: overstaying is indeed a crime, as victimless as it might be.

I would also hesitate to jump from “some cops / immigration officials are bastards” to “the government is”.

I can think of one reason why the Chinese person was treated differently: he was caught at Narita, you (I assume) voluntarily ‘dobbed yourself in’. However I do agree that if a factor, it is probably not the only one. Complete gut reaction is that cops attract closet and not-so-closet racists in any country: they are given a position of power over others, after all.

And I don’t think anyone would ever believe any government’s claim to have taken “all conceivable measures” about anything, really.

Rate this comment: 0  0

In other words Japanese constitution states it needs laws to carry out the “ideology” written down…hence the need for laws and not relying solely on the constitution as all encompassing as it is simply a frame-work!

No. As I said

For your reference, it is well known that Japanese constitution such as the article 15, 18, 24, 27-3, 28 is directly applicable to citizens and it is widely admitted that the article such as 14 is applicable via civil code art 90, 709 etc.
http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=5874#comment-228411

And civil code has been effective before this constitution. It is just that there was parts that need to be amended to enforce the new ideology of the new constitution.
Besides, your argument does not show Japanese constitution is not law. A citizen must obey the article 27-3. A citizen must obey the article 14 and civil code 90.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Stereo is right, if we can’t even decide what laws exist and what don’t this conversation is pointless.

Rate this comment: 0  0

What you all continuously fail to understand, is that the Japanese constitution is for Japanese nationals only. (see article 10)

I cited this, but I’ll cite it again.

It is generally accepted that the protection of rights and freedoms under the Constitution extends to foreign nationals resident in Japan insofar as the nature of of the given right allows it. …

page 432 Japanese Law second edtion Hiroshi Oda, oxford

A tourist from, “A” country, visits Japan. As soon as s/he walks out of the airport experiences discrimination. What law is there to protect him/her?

Of course article 14 coupled with civil code etc as I explained.

As for “WE” have been talking about the law. The pronoun “WE” is the operative word. “I” wasn’t.

But You were talking about anti-discrimination law, no?

If you also believe that the constitution is LAW, then why have laws? Just the constitution is suffice!

Constitution is law and civil code is law criminal code is law.
Your logic is flawed because it does not hold if civil code is law, why have laws? Just civil law is suffice.

So why are you in a debate..if you have no motivation?

Suppose you argue that 1 ＋2＝3 to make yourself look smart. Making yourself look smart is your motivation. but it has nothing to do with the validity of your statement that 1 ＋2＝3.

On that note, im off to eat breakfast

Just enjoy your breakfast.

Rate this comment: 0  0

U.S. Citizenship test handbook also asks, “What is the Constitution?”

Answer: The supreme law of the land.

“The U.S. Constitution has lasted longer than any other country’s constitution. It is the basic legal framework establishing the U.S. Government. Every person and every agency and department of government must follow the Constitution. This is why it is called the “supreme law of the land.” Under this system, the powers of the national government are limited to those written in the Constituion. The guiding principle behind this sytem is often called the rule of law”.”

Since it’s a “basic legal framework”, it can often lead to different intepretation. However, since it also states that every person “must follow” the Constitution, one can interpret that as “anti-discrimmination” law.

Rate this comment: 0  0

A selection of U.S. newspaper headlines.

* Death for man who kidnapped, murdered Idaho boy
* 3 arrested in 2 Texas school threats
* Man Found With Gun, Bomb Near Capitol Gets 22 Years
* 6 Israelis charged with drug trafficking in Calif.
* Ruling in 1980s Japanese businessman case delayed
* Pakistani Woman Faces Assault Charges.
* S.Korean student blamed for shooting rampage

Can you tell from the headlines which articles are about Americans and which are about non-Americans?

Rate this comment: 0  0

I am not sure we can talk about it or are qualified to talk about it, if we cannot even agree on basics like if there is no law that prohibits discrimination in Japan.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Without motivation, there is not point to a discussion or topic of discussion. The motivation brings context. You are motivated to allay misconceptions about Japan to others

But　the motivation has nothing to do with the validity of the argument and asking the motivation is often used to derail the topic.

Can you explain to me where i raised to issue of US law?
Can you explain to me where i raised to issue of the constitution?

Yes, we have been talking about the law, especially anti-discrimination law.

there is no anti-discrimination law that exists in Japan.

You are repeating the old claim without clarifying the concept.

…but it does nothing except expose a bias and unwillingness to acknowledge a simple fact of Japanese law,

That is not case, I am simply trying to clarify your comment by asking your usage of the word “anti-discrimination law”.

It really amuses me that in order to attempt to defend a defenceless position, one begins bathos and meander into “another” countries set of rules as justification.

When did I try to defend my position—and what is my position?–I am just asking simple questions— by citing other countries?

As for a constitution, if you must.
It is a system of of laws and basic principles that a country is governed by. In other words, procedural.
A Law, is the whole system of rules that everyone must obey.
Being constitutional, does not automatically make something law

Wait wait.
Constitution is a system of law So is Japanese constitution law or not? This is a simple question.
For your reference, it is well known that Japanese constitution such as the article 15, 18, 24, 27-3, 28 is directly applicable to citizens and it is widely admitted that the article such as 14 is applicable via civil code art 90, 709 etc.
http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=5874#comment-228411

If you say Japanese constitution is law, then you turn out to be wrong because the article 14 is anti-discrimination law that covers all aspects of society.

If you say Japanese constitution is not law, the claim is dubious.

constitution
(Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary)
1: an established law or custom
5 a: the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it
（Cambridge International Dictionary of English)
* constitute (FORM PART OF)
* constitution (LAWS)
* constitution (HEALTH)

If you say the U.S. housing act is not anti-discrimination law, there is no use of law which covers all aspects of society because even if there is such a law in the U.S. it does not protect the foreigners equally.

If you say the U.S. housing act is anti-discrimination law, the law is not what people here is talking about;for, people are talking about the right of the foreigners in Japan.And in this case too, the law covering all aspects of society you are talking about does not matter, because the law does not protect the foreigners equally whether such comprehensive anti-discrimination law exist or not.
I really doubt such comprehensive if it does not protect people equally in a specific context is useful.

Let’s enjoy discussion, John K.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

I’ve grown up in Japan as a non-Japanese Asian and I’ve felt the racism all the time,

It might be profitable if you wrote essays specifically how you felt racism. I’ve read the story that international child who was born between a Japanese and a foreigner was picked on because he/she looked different. I’ve never had a classmate with international parent, but I had a disabled classmate ;I remember she was picked on because she acted different. A teacher got furious when some students bullied her, so the bully stopped. I think raising consciousness and education is important. Your stories, if written without hatred, would be enlightening and I think there are many Japanese who are willing to listen.

although many Japanese people don’t realize that and deny its existence

sorry, but this is still vague. I sometimes frankly chat with a Chinese woman who runs a Chinese restaurant. As a side note, one of his son goes to a elementary school at California. In her perception, the U.S., to paraphrase her words, is white-man’s society. There are zainichi Korean living in my neighbor, I have absolutely no problems with them just I have no problem with other Japanese.
Specifically in what respect do you think I–or the Japanese people —- should be careful when talking to an Asian person?

Rate this comment: 0  0

The question is not whether there is discrimination in Japan, or even whether there are laws in Japan against discrimination. The question is whether or not “Japan has taken every conceivable measure to fight against racial discrimination.”

That proposition is laughable. In exactly which alternative universe was this exhaustive list of been measures taken?

Would the government’s foreign trainee program (which was obviously never intended, as advertised, to be a means of transferring Japanese technology to developing countries; it was intended from the beginning to be a means of importing cheap labor for small Japanese companies that are struggling with a labor shortage and relatively high labor costs) be an example of these measures?

I had an interesting experience 4 years ago. I was supposed to have renewed my spousal visa in March of that year, but it slipped my mind until May, when my memory was jogged by a notice to renew my driver’s license that I had received in the mail.

Of course, I had managed to do this at a time when the government was cracking down on illegal immigrants. To make a long story short, I was literally treated like a criminal. I had fingerprints taken from all ten fingers, plus mug shots: full frontal and both profiles. At one point in a deliberately humiliating process, I was being grilled by a special officer who deals with overstayers, with my panicking wife at my side. Just next to me was a guy from Hong Kong who was in exactly the same boat as me. As I couldn’t help but overhear, the fact that he had forgotten to renew his spousal visa was picked up on at Narita Airport when he had gone there to meet his mother who was coming to Japan to see the new baby that he and his wife had just had.

The thing is, he was treated to a very different tone than I (a very white man: I make Dan Akroyd look ethnic) was. The officer talking to me was sooo nice, he was lovey-dovey, but the Chinese guy was asked whether he had ever committed any crimes in Japan and generally, as my wife also noticed, treated with suspicion and disdain.

So, my point is that the Japanese government’s record regarding racial discrimination has been mixed at best. They have, especially recently, taken some measures to combat it; but I, and I’m sure most other people, can conceive of many measures that have yet to be taken.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0

To be more specific about the previous post, I’ve grown up in Japan as a non-Japanese Asian and I’ve felt the racism all the time, although many Japanese people don’t realize that and deny its existence (especially towards Asians, as they think they’re fair to those who look similar to them, at least).

In contrast, I’ve never felt that in California.

I’m not “emotionally or psychologically impacted” at all;
I’ve lived in Japan for more than half of my life, so I’ve kinda given up on trying to fix that.. but I still feel the need for a change.

Rate this comment: 0  0

Rate this comment: 0  0