Posts Tagged women
MADRE: Aid is Power. Who Do You Want to Empower?
Interesting op-ed piece from MADRE regarding international aid and development:
In the immediate aftermath of a catastrophe like the earthquake in Haiti, you’re focused on one question: How can I help? It’s the right question, but the answer isn’t always what it seems. Many people assume that donating to a large relief agency is the surest way to help meet the overwhelming need. People trust a name-brand; and in fact, these organizations do have a critical role to play, especially where government doesn’t or can’t assume full responsibility for disaster relief.
The problem is that most big relief operations are designed to swoop into a crisis, deliver services and leave. And when they do leave, people are no more knowledgeable, self-reliant or resilient than they were before. Your first priority in a crisis is to help save lives. In Haiti, and other places where people face frequent disasters, it’s critical to help save lives in a way that builds community capacity to respond to the next disaster and ultimately, move toward real development.
On Roman Polanski’s arrest
After reading about the case, I realized it is much more complicated than I originally thought. Apparently the judge reneged on a plea bargain and there was some other judicial misconduct. But the big thing for me is that it brings up this woman’s name all over again in the papers, and I’m sure it is not easy for her and her family now. But in the end, Polanski raped a 13 year old girl (and I don’t buy the bull that he didn’t know she was 13), and he fled. Whether there was judicial misconduct or not, he fled. It doesn’t matter how many films he made, how many Oscars he won, or what happened to him in Poland, or what happened to his wife, or what plea bargains were made and broken — he committed a serious crime and he fled. Instead of the “outrage” that the French government is proclaiming, perhaps the outrage should be directed to France for having shielded him for so long.
If it is true that he just “panicked” and fled, and that there was judicial misconduct — and if he is truly repentant like he says he is — then he could have faced up to his crime and gone back to be held accountable for his actions. So while I do sympathize with the woman and her plea for him to be released, there is also a greater principle here — that no one is above the law, and that people who commit serious crimes — particularly crimes like his that do traumatic and lasting damage to someone — need to be held accountable.
But unfortunately, I rather doubt he will… hope I’m proven wrong, though.
Criticism of NYT article on hostesses in Japan
I have to say that I am quite disappointed in a recent NYT article on hostesses in Japan for a number of reasons. First, the emphasis is almost entirely on the increasing popularity and “glamor” of hostessing with very little mentioned about the dangers that women in the industry often face. The article makes it sound like the greatest dangers from hostessing are drinking and partying too much. That, unfortunately, is the least of their worries. Human trafficking is a very real issue in the industry, with women from both overseas and within Japan tricked or coerced into the industry, or being lied to about the working conditions or pay. Women are often pressured or required to go out on “dates”, or “dohan”, with male clients, where sex is often involved.* There is a strong connection between hostess bars and prostitution — both geographically and otherwise — and unfortunately the article devoted very little attention to that.
In addition, the article stated that prostitution is “illegal”. Actually, only the act of coitus is illegal, and even that receives scant enforcement. For instance, if a hostess and her male client go out on a “date” and have sex, the male client can claim that he paid only for the “date” and that they both “consented” to have sex. This is also how the “soaplands” get around the law as well.
What is interesting is that even in a recession, the male demand to spend large amounts of money for the sexual exploitation of women is still high. That plus the fact that there are few opportunities for women to be financially independent and secure in Japanese society make it an increasingly popular option for women. What does it say about a society that the most lucrative jobs available to women are those where they are required to please men?
Criticism of “Sour Strawberries”
The Kansai Scene recently reviewed a documentary called Sour Strawberries, which focuses on the exploitation of foreign laborers in Japan.
To begin with, the Kansai Scene article describes Kabuchiko as “one of Japan’s foreigner friendly hotspots”. The glaring omission in this description, of course, is that Kabukicho is a hotspot for sexual exploitation — hostess bars, pornographic video stores, and, of course, brothels. This omission, along with the characterization of Kabukicho as a “hotspot” for foreigners, is troubling.
I myself purchased the film recently. While overall I thought it was interesting, I found the scene with Debito in Kabukiko problematic on a number of levels. In this scene, Debito is walking in Kabukicho and discovers a sign which prohibits foreigners from entering an establishment. He raises objections to the sign with a staff member, and an argument ensues.
However, the establishment was most likely a hostess bar, brothel, or some other venue where men sexually exploit women, in an area teaming with similar establishments. As Debito has pointed out, these establishments often hire and exploit foreign women. In fact, the human trafficking of foreign women for sexual exploitation in Japan has been well-documented (see here as well as Debito’s recent post on the UN’s criticism of Japan in this regard). In a documentary about the exploitation of foreign workers in Japan, wouldn’t it have made more sense to focus attention on the plight of these women rather than on the men who fuel the demand for the industry which exploits them?
UPDATE: The above was also posted in the comments section on debito.org, where a discussion of my comments is taking place.
Offensive Bacardi ads
An Israeli company recently put together an ad campaign for Bacardi that is one of the offensive and hateful ad campaigns I have seen. I’ve come across quite a few misogynistic alcohol ads before, but this one really takes it to a whole new level.
Here is the response that was posted on the Women’s Media Center blog from “Bacardi”:
Thank you for taking the time to post your story regarding Bacardi Breezer.
The campaign you are referring to ran in 2008 for two months in Israel. Even though Bacardi Breezer is not sold or distributed in the United States, we immediately notified the appropriate Bacardi affiliate and had this website shut down.
Bacardi proudly celebrates diversity and we do not endorse the views of this site. We sincerely apologize to anyone who was offended by this site and thank you for bringing it to our attention.
I did a bit of research to make sure it wasn’t bogus. It appears to be a form letter response from Bacardi to those who have complained about the ad — the same stock response from Bacardi is referred to on another blog about this ad campaign as well. (I couldn’t find anything on the Bacardi web site itself, however.)
In my opinion, it’s a first step, but not enough. I think they need to explain how this ad got produced in the first place. Explaining it away as a decision by some rogue affiliate is not enough. It was using the Bacardi name and advertising a Bacardi product, so Bacardi needs to show that they have taken steps to make sure that these kinds of ads do appear again.
However, given that another Bacardi ad has a of a woman’s half-naked back with a Bacardi tattoo stamped just above her ass, I wouldn’t count on that happening.
No more Bacardi for me.
UPDATE: It appears that Bacardi is getting a lot of flak over this — a lot of blogs and discussion groups have been talking about this for the last few days. Bacardi has since revised their response, which they have been posting in the comments section on several blogs in response to the controversy:
We wish to thank all of you who have written us about a past promotional campaign for Bacardi Breezer.
As a Company and as individuals we are also angered and dismayed that such a campaign was ever created and we have taken immediate action to stop it as it violated our stringent global marketing principles that we firmly support.
By way of explanation, but by no means an excuse, Bacardi never sponsored nor developed this promotion. But we understand it is our brand and our reputation and you are our consumers. We are also embarrassed that we didn’t catch this breach sooner. We have been urgently looking into this matter to make sure this type of activity is never repeated.
What we do know is that a third-party developed and activated this brief campaign in one small market more than a year ago without our clearance. When we discovered this promotion, we instructed our distributor to shut it down as it did not comply with our global marketing standards. We are now urgently looking into the reasons why this program was recently reposted on the internet. In markets where Bacardi does not have a corporate presence, we are represented by third parties; in this case a distributor and its advertising agency, but they must adhere to our stringent marketing principles, which clearly this campaign did not.
When Bacardi found out about this recent reposting, we immediately notified the agency and distributor to shutdown the website.
Bacardi proudly celebrates diversity and we do not endorse the views of this site or the campaign, as it is offensive and completely inappropriate. We sincerely apologize to anyone who was offended by this campaign and thank you, our consumers for bringing it to our attention.
Sincerely,
Bacardi Limited
This explanation is certainly better than their first attempt. I think they have realized that this is doing serious damage to their brand.
What’s interesting is that the publicist for Bacardi, Sean-Patrick Hillman, wrote a tweet on Twitter (which has since been removed): “Ah, crisis communication on a Sunday… why can’t people get a brain… or at least use the one they were born with?” Hopefully the brainless people he refers to would be those at McCann Digital.
By the way, for those of you on Twitter who want to contact McCann Digital on Twitter to express how you feel about their ad campaign — and the fact that they were so proud of it that they submitted it to a festival in Cannes — they can be reached at @McCann_Israel , or you can contact their associates directly: @alonbrenner @shaygoren @Refuah @Yuval32 @vivi6 @shaialmagor @Meravkan
Questions regarding “A Missed Chance To Defend Women’s Rights”
With regard to a recent piece on Forbes, I would like to focus on this excerpt:
“But to mention what sexism remains in American society in the same breath as the brutal misogyny still pervasive in many parts of the Islamic world is absurd. If Joe locks his wife in the closet, beats her senseless, forbids her to talk to other men and monitors every penny she spends, Bill should be able to express disapproval of his actions without castigating himself for failing to do exactly half of the housework and child care.”
I’m having some difficulty understanding this statement. First, it seems to be implying that there is not much sexism and misogyny that remains in the United States, an implication that I find to be unsupportable (one needs only to look at the rates of sexual assault in the U.S. to find ample evidence which counters this assumption). Second, there is the implication that a husband who doesn’t share the responsibilities of housework with his wife is somehow exempt from any criticism regarding his own behaviors and beliefs. I believe the author has set up a bit of a false dichotomy here.
Men should criticize misogyny and sexism both abroad and at home; they should offer criticism towards the behaviors of other men as well as themselves. It is not an either-or situation.
UPDATE: I posted this on the writer’s blog and an interesting dialog ensued in the comments section.
White anti-feminist men in Japan
There was a study done a few years ago which examined attitudes towards women among American men who were in college fraternities compared with American men in general. It found, not surprisingly, that those men in fraternities were more likely to have anti-feminist and misogynistic attitudes when compared with men in the general population. What I think would also be interesting is if a study were conducted that looked at the attitudes of white men in Japan compared with white men in the general population of their home countries. My feeling is that a similar trend would be found with regard to their attitudes about women.
Many foreign women living in Japan have told me that the white men they encounter in Japan very much fit within this description. One said that there is a common acronym that is used to describe them: “LBH” (Losers Back Home), which refers to a foreign man who is socially inept or socially unacceptable in his own country but thrives in Japan. How common are these men in Japan, and what affect do they have?
I have written from time to time on this journal about Gregory Clark, vice-president of Akita University and former Australian diplomat who has a regular opinion column in the Japan Times. Mr. Clark is a frequent contributor to the National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR) Japan-U.S. discussion forum (to which I also contribute), a moderated online forum of academics, businesspeople, policymakers, and others with an interest in Japan-related issues. I have written before about Mr. Clark’s controversial and inaccurate statements regarding his support for merchants who engage in racial/ethnic discrimination. He recently has been opining about the announced resignation of Japan’s prime minister and the race to succeed him, specifically focusing on the chances of Ms. Koike, a former minister of defense, who he referred to as a “still-unmarried lady” who has “coquettish appeal”. He concludes by stating that “the ease with which females come to the top in political scrums worldwide is something the political scientists, and the feminists, should be looking at”.
One professor rightly took exception to these statements, particulary that which referred to the apparent “ease” in which women rise to the top — despite the fact that only 4% of heads of state worldwide are women. Not to mention the use of term “coquettish”, a highly gendered term which does not have a masculine equivalent.
Mr. Clark then shot back: “Feminists should lighten up sometimes. If they did, women could begin rise to many other top positions and put an end to the dreadful male macho belligerence that does so much harm to this world.”
I see. So in other words, Mr. Clark believes that these uppity feminists are actually working against equal rights and equal opportunity, and that everything would be fine if they just shut up. Amazing. If we substituted “black civil rights activists” for “feminists” and “blacks” for “women”, I wonder what kind of reaction it would receive (if it even were approved by the moderator to begin with, as the above post was). Needless to say, I wrote a strong rebuke of Mr. Clark’s comments, and I wondered how the faculty and students at his university would react if they were to read such rhetoric coming from their vice-president.
This is not the first time that such anti-feminist rhetoric has been posted on the forum. Another frequent contributor to the forum, a professor at Taisho University, has also made anti-feminist statements on this forum. Earlier this year he wrote that “feminists have something of a track record of making assertions and demands that are not always well grounded and not necessarily in accord with the constituency they allegedly represent.” Again, substitute “feminists” with “black activists” and I doubt that any white professor would get away with making such a statement publicly, let alone getting it approved on such a forum.
Based on my professional and personal experiences, I have found this kind of anti-feminist rhetoric — along with much, much worse — to be unfortunately quite common among foreign white men living in Japan. One has to wonder why so many of these men come to Japan. Is there something about Japan which attracts men with such anti-feminist views? How do their views affect their personal and professional relationships with Japanese? Given that some are in senior positions within business and academia, how much of an impact does it have on policy and international relations?
Recent Comments