/

Japan’s foreign minister challenges use of ‘sex slaves’ term for ‘comfort women’

by

Staff Writer

Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida argued Monday that “comfort women” should not be described as “sex slaves,” challenging widespread use of the term by Western media outlets.

“The term ‘sex slaves’ doesn’t match the facts, and (the Japanese government) believes it should not be used,” Kishida said during a session of the Upper House Budget Committee when asked about the matter by Takashi Uto, a fellow member of the Liberal Democratic Party.

Kishida also said the South Korean government has confirmed that the formal term used by Seoul is “victims of the comfort women issue of the Japanese military,” not “sex slaves.”

The term “comfort woman” is a euphemism for females who were forced into Japanese military brothels in the 1930s and ’40s.

On Dec. 28, Seoul and Tokyo reached a landmark agreement to settle a long-standing diplomatic row over issues involving these women. The deal includes setting up a ¥1 billion fund for the women.

When reporting on the agreement, many major Western media outlets, including the Washington Post, New York Times, Guardian and CNN, used the term “sex slaves.”

It is the policy of The Japan Times that “sex slaves” is acceptable for referring to the women who were forced to provide sex for Japanese troops before and during World War II.

The Japanese government admitted “the honor and dignity of many women” was damaged with “the involvement” of the military authorities, and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe expressed his “most sincere apologies and remorse” for the suffering of comfort women.

But Japan has not recognized its legal responsibilities because private-sector businesses, not wartime Japanese authorities, are believed to have been the main entities that recruited the women on the Korean Peninsula.

Japan has also maintained that all compensation issues involving Japan’s 1910-1945 colonial rule were “settled completely and finally” in a bilateral pact attached to the 1965 Japan-South Korea basic treaty.

  • bumfromkorea

    “Sorry, but not really.” – the story of Japan’s attitude towards its atrocious past since the 1950’s.

    • Clickonthewhatnow

      Meanwhile Korea nags at Japan about comfort women while blissfully ignoring their own comfort women in Vietnam. Huh.

    • Clickonthewhatnow

      Meanwhile Korea nags at Japan about comfort women while blissfully ignoring their own comfort women in Vietnam. Huh.

    • createpeace

      Koreans never accept apologies. Because it is their traditional culture. Japan has compensated them from 1948. In 1965, Japan paid Korea 300billion dollars but Korea didn’t compensated the comfort women with the money at all. Japan also compensated the women in 2007, 6billion yen for 285 women. 200 million yen and other welfare for each woman. But the support groups of the women didn’t give them money. Only 60 women could get it but still they blame Japan. Japan apologized too much for decades. And started to notice that the women were used by propaganda. You just didn’t know.

      • jellybean

        no, japan didn’t apologize. They just threw money and was like “here’s the compensation money so take this and let’s just make the history as nothing.”
        what koreans really want is a sincere apology and they cant see anything ‘sincere’ in abe’s apology. also, a councilor in japan referred to sex slaves as the ‘job for prostitutes’. a japanese designer, dai inami, uploaded her picture titled:‘sexy lady’, which was disparaging the Girl Statue. and japan is now asking south korea to remove the statue because they apologized. if they were sincere, they wouldn’t do all this because the history should remain and be reminded to japanese children. they shouldn’t just cover up this issue for money.

      • createpeace

        You didn’t know that apologizing means kneeling down their knees as slaves for Korean people. That’s why Korean can’t accept Japan’s apology. They are not honest at all.
        And talking about historical facts, Korea started telling a lie first. More than 90 % of policemen and politicians were Koreans in the era. Korean people learned Korean language at school as they didn’t read or write in the era at all.
        But soon after Japan and Korea lost the war, she started to tell a lie that she won the war and fought with Japan. Now she teach false history and hate in school and keep telling a lie. How can Japan be more generous? Korea has been dishonest for more than 70 years.

      • bumfromkorea

        Each apology, attached with immediate insults from Prime Ministers (this includes Abe), Diet members, Ministers, etc.

        Bumfromkorea: *punches createpeace in the mouth*
        Createpeace: Ouch! WTF?
        Bumfromkorea: Hey, you know what? My bad.
        Createpeace: Jesus, that hurts.
        Bumfromkorea: What a whiny little b****
        Createpeace: What did you just say?!
        Bumfromkorea: Oh, hey. I’m sorry about that. That’s my bad.
        Createpeace: Okay….
        Bumfromkorea: You kinda deserved it, though.
        Createpeace: WTF?!
        Bumfromkorea: All right, I’m sorry, okay? Jeez. Move on already.
        Createpeace: What do you mean, move on?! You just-
        Bumfromkorea: OMG dude. I apologized like THREE times already. What more do you want?! Kneel and become your slave or something? Jesus!

      • createpeace

        Because Korea tells a lie. The prostitues are used for propaganda. They bought houses and diamonds. Went to picnic with soldiers. Everyone began to notice it is the propaganda which uses whole Korean people and people in US.
        Korea has no freedom of speech. An old Korean who said he liked Japan and was happy when Korea was a part of Japan was killed by younger Koreans. Just like you punch someone who say something evidences which you don’t want to hear.

      • blondein_tokyo

        What you are really saying is that the “comfort women” are lying – hundreds of them, all of whom tell the same exact story, no matter what country they come from. That includes women from not only Korea, but also China, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Australia, and even Holland.
        Do you believe that these women lied about being raped and held in captivity? Do you think their physical scars and mental trauma is manufactured? Do you actually believe that women would make up a story like this, and keep telling it for 20 years, despite the shame they feel and the hostility they encounter?
        If you really believe that, then you not only lack morality, you lack human decency. I don’t even have the words for the disgust I feel knowing of the existence of rape apologists.

      • blondein_tokyo

        What you are really saying is that the “comfort women” are lying – hundreds of them, all of whom tell the same exact story, no matter what country they come from. That includes women from not only Korea, but also China, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Australia, and even Holland.
        Do you believe that these women lied about being raped and held in captivity? Do you think their physical scars and mental trauma is manufactured? Do you actually believe that women would make up a story like this, and keep telling it for 20 years, despite the shame they feel and the hostility they encounter?
        If you really believe that, then you not only lack morality, you lack human decency. I don’t even have the words for the disgust I feel knowing of the existence of rape apologists.

      • Kayo Kanako Kimura

        Excuse me for interrupting, but I don’t think createpeace is accusing ex-comfort women of lying. Createpeace only pointed out that the ROK government created an untrue fact in history to use against Japan politically. Plz stop twisting other people’s words, like you tried to do to mine. If you ever read the testimonies of ex-comfort women, the first thing you’d notice was how each of their cases differ. The ones of the Dutch women in Semarang was a case in which a group of Japanese soldiers acted on their own in forcing them to work as comfort women, but when the Japanese army found out, those soldiers were punished and the women were rescued. The same soldiers were once again punished by the Dutch court after the war, and the Japanese government paid compensation to the victims. Japan has never tried to hide that case nor ignore it. The cases which happened in other parts of SE Asia were not cases which involved comfort stations, but were cases of rape or gang rape which some Japanese soldiers committed, and Japanese today are not at all proud of them. However, it should be noted that the Japanese army never ordered nor encouraged their soldiers to act in such ways, as there are historical documents left which show they too were punished by the Japanese army for such criminal actions. Otoh, the testimonies of South Korean ex-comfort women are linked to the comfort station system, but only very few of them said it was the Japanese army who took them away from their families and forced them to work in comfort stations. Most of them have openly said that they were sold off to brokers etc. by their parents which was legal back in those days, and in most cases those brokers were not Japanese but Koreans (their words). Even in cases which the brokers seemed to be Japanese, ex-comfort women who were sold off to them said they weren’t sure if they really were Japanese, and the one’s who seem quite sure they were Japanese couldn’t make out if they were soldiers or simply Japanese men because they couldn’t understand what they were saying in Japanese at all.
        I would never say all Japanese soldiers were saints so none of them did any wrong. I’m sure we had our share of bad soldiers just like any army. The only thing most Japanese are trying to make clear, is that the comfort station system was not created on sick intentions such as to enslave foreign women, and that the Japanese army nor government did not work on some evil scheme as such. It was a system to have professional women take care of soldiers so to save them from getting VD in local brothels and also to avoid them creating trouble for non-professional women. It didn’t work perfectly, but not just Japan but many countries had the same type of system for their soldiers for the same reasons, including ROK having their women work as professionals for US soldiers during the Korean war. I’ve read a whole load of books on comfort women issues, which includes many which were edited by supporting groups for ex-comfort women like the House of Sharing Handbook in Korea. They all have the testimonies of ex-comfort women, and I really feel sorry for those who had to work in comfort stations although they did not want to. But it’s only a handful of women who have clearly said they were forced into such a position by none other than the Japanese army, and those women are the ones who’ve either changed their testimonies dramatically since their first ones which didn’t accuse the Japanese army for some mysterious reason they never explain, or women who Korean historians and supporting groups have judged as untrustworthy. The majority of them are only saying they didn’t want to be comfort-women but were sold off to brokers by their families or were tricked by fellow Korean men into the business. Prof.Yu-ha Park wrote in her book (Comfort Women of the Empire) that the anti-Japan propaganda being spread in ROK is allowing all those real culprits to get away with what they’ve done, which I very much agree with. It’s easy to assume and believe Japanese soldiers were the one and only evil existing in Asia in that period, so you can put all the blame about everything bad which happened on them. But if you truly care for ex-comfort women to have the justice they deserve, you need to try to understand what really went on and how things were so different back then from an objective point of view, before you accuse or hate anyone in history based on shallow knowledge maintained from media articles like this one.

      • blondein_tokyo

        Once again, I have never made the claim that the comfort women were recruited by the army.

        I said that the women were kept captive and raped by the army. This is the truth as you have already acknowledged several times, so I am not sure why you think you need to keep arguing with me.

      • Kayo Kanako Kimura

        Trust me, I do not take any pleasure in arguing with you. I’m just stating the facts I’ve learned through reading books on this matter. If you do not have the wrong idea that the Japanese army systematically forced women into the comfort system, fine. I do not though, agree with your view that comfort women were held ‘captive’ by the Japanese army in comfort stations. Firstly there are quite a few testimonies of ex-comfort women in which they have described their lives in comfort stations much more flexible than you seem to imagine. They went out on days off to shop, went on dates with soldiers to the movies, attended parties willingly in which sometimes they even sang songs and received applause. A Koren ex-comfort woman named Mun Ok-ju even bought a diamond for herself, and plotted to remain working as a comfort woman somehow, when the Japanese army decided to send her and the other women she worked with home to Korea. This was the very first version of how she told her life as a comfort woman in a book titled “Myself who was a Comfort Woman for Tate Division deployed in the Burma Theater (ビルマ戦線楯師団の「慰安婦」だった私)” published was first published in 1996 by Nashinoki-sya publishing company, which was based on interviews by Morita Machiko (森田万智子) who was totally sympathetic to Mun. Morita was expecting a tear shedding story of how painful and sad Mun’s life was as a comfort woman, but it didn’t turn out that way. I’ve also read a book which introduced an ex-comfort woman who requested to have her remains buried in an island in SE Asia where she worked in a comfort station to a close friend who was also an ex-comfort woman, as she felt the happiest time of her life was when she worked there. She said she felt both the soldiers and natives on that island were the closest thing she ever had to family, and loved having parties with them outdoors almost every night. I have also heard about an ex-comfort woman who willingly worked in the system to support all of her relatives, who was clever and a hard worker that the owner of the comfort station made her a manager after she worked for several months as a comfort woman at first, from a relative of hers who still appreciates her for doing so and told me he and his family are not the least bit ashamed of her who was an aunt to him. She met her future husband in China which was where her comfort station was, but he was not a soldier but a member of a camera crew for movies, whom she met outside the comfort station meaning she was not being held captive. I can introduce you other examples which show the majority of ex-comfort women were not held ‘captive’ nor being raped in any sense, but it’ll get too long so I’ll stop here. Now, I am not saying all comfort women were treated nicely in such ways. I assume there were some comfort stations which treated the women badly. I sympathize with women who had to work in such types of comfort stations. Still, here again, it wasn’t the Japanese army which was actually running comfort stations, therefore if anyone held women ‘captive’ and had them ‘raped’, it was the owners. In addition, many of the comfort stations were owned by Koreans, not Japanese. When the Japanese army established comfort stations in China, they had local brothels owned by Chinese to be reformed into comfort stations. The first thing they did upon doing so, was to set strict rules for Chinese brothel owners to treat the women there as human beings, since they were shocked to have found out Chinese owners did not give any freedom to the women there, but treated them like animals. This was written in a non-fiction book called “Wuhan Military Logistics (武漢兵站)” by Seikichi Yamada 山田清吉 (published by Tosho Shuppan 図書出版 1979) , long before comfort women became an issue, and the women who were working in those Chinese brothels were Korean women. Human trafficking happened everywhere in the Korean peninsula long before the annexation period, and many Korean women had already ended up willingly or unwillingly in the Chinese sex industry. There was absolutely no reason for the author of this book to write lies about all this when he did.
        I’m not against you feeling sorry for some of the ex-comfort women who did not want to work in the stations, nor was able to find enjoy any free. But I do have a problem with you posting comments which pretty much makes it seem as if ALL comfort women were ‘sex slaves’, which is so untrue. There were women who liked working as comfort women and were proud of it. It’s nothing but an insult to call them ‘sex slaves’.

      • blondein_tokyo

        Just as I did not say the army recruited the women, I also did not say all the comfort women were sex slaves. And as far as I know, no one is claiming that, since it is well-known that there were also prostitutes working at the comfort stations.

        However, it IS accurate to say that the particular women we are speaking of, the women who have come out and said they were forced, were in fact sex slaves. It is disingenuous to try and muddy the waters, as you have, by claiming this article is about the prostitutes who worked at the comfort stations. It is not about the women who worked of their own volition; it about those “comfort women” who were kidnapped, tricked, or sold, and then forced to work against their will. These women *were* held against their will. They *were* raped. therefore it is perfectly accurate to refer to them as “sex slaves”.

        As you said yourself, not all the women were treated well. This is historical fact and not arguable. So again, I ask, why are you still attempting to argue?

        “Therefore if anyone held women ‘captive’ and had them ‘raped’, it was the owners.”

        Yes, the persons who ran the comfort stations are absolutely responsible. However, the soldiers who paid for sex are still guilty of rape, even if they had no idea that they were committing it. Having sex with someone who did not consent doesn’t become not-rape just because the sex was paid for. Men who visit prostitutes still have an *ethical* and *moral* responsibility to be sure they are not paying for sex with a trafficked woman.

        In addition, if a man enjoys having sex with women who are visibly distressed, and not enjoying it, then that man is a monster as well a rapist.

      • Kayo Kanako Kimura

        You have been forcing me into a position in which I didn’t have much of a choice to reply to you. I had made my opinions clear on comfort women issues, and it is you who had been continuously leading me into an argument. Although it was in another thread, I have told you clearly that I do not mind if you view the past differently compared to myself. You otoh, is the one who has been so aggressive in trying to force me to admit I am wrong in everything I say, and I’m getting sick of it.

        The last thing you wrote…

        >if a man enjoys having sex with women who are visibly distressed, and not enjoying it, then that man is a monster as well a rapist.

        I feel is totally unfair to all men in general. There are countless women in the past as well as today, who provide sexual services to men as a profession, whether it’s legal or not. I assume not all of these women are not doing so happily, but because they have no other means to make a living. Hence by your definition of men being a ‘monster as well as a rapist’, the majority of men who have consensual with professional prostitutes fit that description. Men having sex in an ordinary relationship with women who were up to it at first, but didn’t actually like it as it went along will also end up being some ‘monster’ or a ‘rapist’. Many women have certainly had this kind of experience, but I don’t think they consider them as rape victims at all. By saying the above, I think you’ve insulted the majority of the male sex, and stating that men who have consensual sex with prostitutes having all the ‘ethical’ and ‘moral’ responsibility to be sure they were not trafficked, I feel is a bit too much. What do you expect them to do? Go around asking prostitutes how they got into the business? Do you honestly think prostitutes who make a living on what they do will tell guys who may be their customers their tragic stories of being trafficked into their positions, just so the guy would end up walking away? Prostitutes are people who do what they do to survive, so I think they’d keep silent about having being trafficked even if they were, if they feel that may cost them losing a customer. And if a prostitute decides to keep silent about how she was pushed into the business, I don’t think you can blame their customers for being a ‘monster’ nor a ‘rapist’. I think your demands towards men are way too strict.

        I understand now that for you, this whole comfort women issue isn’t a historical matter, but more of a feminist thing of some kind. And frankly, of all people, I do not wish to discuss this with people who only think of this as some women’s rights issue. To me and to many other Japanese, it is an issue which involves the honor of our ancestors who risked their lives to protect their families as much as their country in that war. To many Koreans, it is also an issue which is very important to them because they care about the ex-comfort women because they’re one of them. Japanese and Koreans may not agree on the details on this issue, but we are both concerned about it as it’s about people whom we respect. I for one do not welcome others who only see the comfort women issue as a mere opportunity to promote feminist values. You may as well go ahead and do so, but I refuse to have any argument or whatever with someone like you. Plz don’t bother me anymore.

      • blondein_tokyo

        “I do not mind if you view the past differently compared to myself.”

        It’s not a matter of different views, actually. We seem to be in agreement on everything other than the use of the word “sex slave”. I still don’t quite understand why you object so strongly, considering that you have said several times that you know that the women in question, who are being called “comfort women” in this article, were forced to do sex work against their will, which is what a sex slave is.

        And no, you don’t seem to “understand” me. All along you’ve been reading into my words things I haven’t said. For example, you tried to accuse me of saying the Japanese Imperial Army recruited the women, when I didn’t; you tried to say that I claimed ALL the women who worked at the comfort stations were raped, when I hadn’t; and now you’re trying to say that I think all prostitutes are sex slaves. That is the most ridiculous thing you’ve said so far.

        You do understand the context of this conversation, don’t you? You understand we are talking about a particular group of women who have said they were kidnapped, sold, or tricked into sexual slavery and held captive? That is the context under which I said men who have sex with women who do not consent are monsters. I also made it clear by stating the men who have sex with prostitutes have a moral and ethical responsibility to be sure that they aren’t having sex with *trafficked women*.

        I am well aware that many women do sex work and enjoy it, because I have friends who have done sex work. I happen to be pro-sex work, actually, and am a big supporter of legalization, for many reasons, but one of them is that it would stem the tide of women who are being forced into sex work, by regulating who is allowed to work and who is allowed to buy. Another reason is that I firmly believe a woman’s body is hers to do with as she pleases; that she is the owner of her sexual agency; and no one should have the right to tell a woman how or why she should be allowed to have sex.

        “I think you’ve insulted the majority of the male sex, and stating that
        men who have consensual sex with prostitutes having all the ‘ethical’ and ‘moral’ responsibility to be sure they were not trafficked, I feel is a bit too much.”

        Then I think you need to check your moral compass. I don’t know why you aren’t more disgusted and angry about the plight of trafficked women, and I don’t know why you are so reluctant to use the word “sex slave” to refer to those women. You are a woman, too. I’d think you’d be on the side of the women, and be willing to come out and fight for them.

        “To me and to many other Japanese, it is an issue which involves the honorof our ancestors who risked their lives to protect their families as much as their country in that war.”

        I’m not surprised this is the reason you argue. It seems you are more concerned about the reputation of Japan than you are about the plight of the comfort women. This is very typical of apologists such as yourself.

        But you do understand that those who deny history are doomed to repeat it? That we should not deny the wrongs of the past out of some misguided notion of “honor”, especially when raping women, even during the course of war, is absolutely DIShonable.

        I am American, and my country enslaved black people for over a hundred years. We also slaughtered the native Americans who rightfully owned the land, and now we force those people to live on “reservations” where poverty reigns. It’s a disgusting aspect of our history, and you will never, ever see me denying, justifying, or obfuscating history in some attempt to make history look more favorable to myself.

        You might want to have a think about the concepts of humility, justice, and honesty rather than “honor”.

  • wrle

    Then what were they? Forced to bake cookies for japanese soldiers at the military brothels?

    • 69station

      At issue is whether/how the women were hired/coerced/forced. The term slave implies being taken against one’s will by force, forced to work for no pay except sustenance, and (usually) never freed to leave by the captors. All the best scholarship on this topic points to a very wide range of cases running the whole spectrum, from regular prostitution to cases of kidnapping resulting in slavery. However, most of that respected scholarship indicates that the latter cases were in a small minority, and those cases as have been confirmed were not the result of systematic and deliberate policy by the Japanese military. There are many cases of prostitutes very willingly seeking such ‘work.’ There are confirmed cases of women being kidnapped/tricked/coerced but this was almost exclusively by Korean factions in the Imperial army of civilians on the Korean peninsula, and/or the women’s parents selling them into indenture. There are cases of the Japanese military acting to free such women, but of course there are many more cases where the military was disinclined to check/may have been deliberately turning a blind eye.

      Hence the objection to using the term ‘sex slaves’ to cover the tens of thousands of cases.

      • wrle

        Comfort women refer strictly to women who were forced to serve at military run brothels against their own will. What does payment and prostitution have anything to do with it? And it was not only korean women. There were thousands across asia including china taiwan phillipines and indonesia. Just keep denying.

      • wrle

        Right. The same way you are trying to blanket them as prostitutes i suppose. Comfort women were forced sex slaves, not free willing money receiving prostitutes and there were not all korean either so learn to differentiate first before attempting to recite Some right winged jargon.

      • 69station

        You are missing my point: many people who (think they) have valid opinions on this topic use the term ‘sex slaves’ to refer to ALL women who were involved in satisfying the sexual urges of men in the Imperial Japanese Army during WW2. In doing so, they are incorrect in many, if not most, cases, according to credible research by people from several nations (including Korea and the USA, not just Japan.)

        I referred to Korea only in the context of confirmed cases of tricking and kidnapping, and I said ALMOST exclusively. I am reciting the research of others, not my opinions.

      • KenjiAd

        Are legal prostitutes in pre-1945 Japan not sex slaves? You see, that’s where the confusion is.

        True, prostitution was legal in Japan until the end of WWII. But do you know how those prostitutes were recruited in Japan?

        Their parents made a contract (usually in the duration of 2-3 years) with the middleman, who gave some money to the parents. In other words, the parents “sold” their daughters to brothels. The daughters cannot leave the brothel until the money is repaid.

        Isn’t this kind of “slavery”?

        Now in Korea, I would imagine, but don’t have the evidence to show, that similar things were going on, probably worse, a lot worse.

        Because in Korea, there was no compulsory education system like in mainland Japan, most poor kids remained illiterate. So when some guy came to a village and offered money to parents, I wouldn’t surprise many of them sold the daughters, telling them that they would be working in, say, restaurants or something.

      • 69station

        “Are legal prostitutes in pre-1945 Japan not sex slaves?”

        They may well have been, but if so, why is the term only being used to refer to this one issue, when:

        1) Prostitution, coerced sexual services, the selling of daughters, outright kidnapping were all far more common throughout the world at that time,

        2) During wartime in particular, these things were and continued to be very common, regardless of which country’s military was using the women?

      • Buck

        69 station is correct
        on so many levels. Clearly a great many of the commenters on this forum need to
        read some scholarly research on the matter.

      • Buck

        69 station is correct
        on so many levels. Clearly a great many of the commenters on this forum need to
        read some scholarly research on the matter.

      • Buck

        69 station is correct
        on so many levels. Clearly a great many of the commenters on this forum need to
        read some scholarly research on the matter.

      • 69station

        “Are legal prostitutes in pre-1945 Japan not sex slaves?”

        They may well have been, but if so, why is the term only being used to refer to this one issue, when:

        1) Prostitution, coerced sexual services, the selling of daughters, outright kidnapping were all far more common throughout the world at that time,

        2) During wartime in particular, these things were and continued to be very common, regardless of which country’s military was using the women?

      • Malaysian Expat

        Were they all forced?

        Research showed that they were prostitutes at first but when the recruiting agents ran out of prostitutes to recruit, force/coercion/human trafficking started to happen.

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia. The latter were more likely to be sex slaves.

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Malaysian Expat

        You are so silly.

        Are Jeju Islanders Korean citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        Koreans and Taiwanese were Japanese citizens because Japan annexed their countries.
        Tibetans are Chinese citizens because China annexed Tibet.

      • Malaysian Expat

        And Jeju islanders are Korean citizens because the Korean annexed their territories.

        So what’s your point again?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • Bruce Chatwin

        It also showed that the Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese (who were all Japanese citizens then) comfort women were different from comfort women from occupied countries like China, Indonesia.

        Like Tibetans are Chinese citizens?

      • KenjiAd

        The media needs to use some short word/phrase to describe “Comfort women” which is a direct translation of Japanese word “Ianfu (慰安婦),” a euphemism. I think use of “sex slaves” is perfectly acceptable for the following reasons.

        The most critical element in slavery is the lack of freedom: a slave cannot quit the service even if s/he wants. How s/he was captured, whether s/he was paid or not, are secondary.

        In other words, even if a girl originally joined a brothel at will and is being paid, she is still a slave if she has no freedom to leave the prostitution.

        We are looking at young girls, most of who were uneducated and illiterate, “working” in a foreign country where their native language didn’t work. The only authority that they could talk to was the Japanese military police who wasn’t there to protect the girls’ human rights.

        So they kept working. They couldn’t think of any other way to survive. They had no freedom to leave and go back.

        If the Japanese Foreign Minister or Abe want to eliminate the use of slavery to describe the situation most Ianfus were in, all they have to prove is this – these girls had a freedom to leave the profession.

      • 69station

        “The media needs to use some short word/phrase to describe “Comfort women” which is a direct translation of Japanese word “Ianfu (慰安婦),” a euphemism. I think use of “sex slaves” is perfectly acceptable…..”

        Only unsophisticated journalism (though I admit that is the norm these days) needs a short word/phrase. The problem with using the term ‘sex slaves’ as a blanket reference is that it shows an adherence to particular view of the issue which is simply not that cut-and-dried.

        Actually, ‘comfort women’, whatever its origins, scores better on this count. If it is clearly known to be a euphemism then it leaves room for all to use it, meaning different things to different people as per their views. I’m not saying there is not an even better term that could be used, though.

      • Bruce Chatwin

        oldspeak: innocent victim
        newspeak: collateral damage

        oldspeak: lie
        newspeak: mis-speak

        oldspeak: sex slaves
        newspeak: comfort women

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • Bruce Chatwin

        I didn’t infer anything other than that the use of euphemistic language is dishonest.

      • 69station

        Yes, you did. You inferred that ‘comfort women’ is automatically a reference to a ‘sex slave.’

      • 69station

        Yes, you did. You inferred that ‘comfort women’ is automatically a reference to a ‘sex slave.’

      • Bruce Chatwin

        I did not imply or infer anything other than that the use of euphemistic language is dishonest. But perhaps that is too much for some to comprehend. BTW, infer also means to suggest, as does imply.

      • 69station

        Oxford University Press, or any other source (UK, USA, Canada, Australia, NZ) you care to use:

        What’s the difference in meaning between imply and infer? If you’re scratching your head, it’s not surprising: many people get these two verbs confused. Here are two sentences in which the wrong one has been chosen:

        X He seems to be inferring, only days after the appointment, that Michael is the wrong man for the job.
        X May I imply from your reply that you would rather be in the Cabinet?

        Imply

        If a speaker or writer implies something, they are suggesting it in an indirect way rather than making an explicit statement. As a reader or listener, you are left to draw your own conclusions from what has been said or hinted.

        Here are some sentences from the Oxford English Corpus that use the verb implycorrectly:

        ✓ I did not mean to imply that there was any truth to these accusations.
        ✓ English Heritage stresses that inclusion in the ‘at risk’ register does not imply any criticism of the property’s owners.
        ✓ The report implies that two million jobs might be lost.

        Someone who implies a fact, belief, or opinion seeks to convey this information but it is up to the person receiving the information to interpret it.

        Infer

        When someone infers something, they reach a conclusion or decide that something is true on the basis of the evidence available. If they are listening to or reading another person’s words, they come to a conclusion about what is meant even though the writer or speaker has not stated this explicitly.

        Infer is often used with the preposition ‘from’.

        Here are three sentences showing the correct use of infer:

        ✓ I inferred from his evidence that he surrendered his licence after the conclusion of the dispute.
        ✓ From this speech, the audience is able to infer that Hamlet will attempt to kill his uncle later in the play.
        ✓ The welcome she received would have led an onlooker to infer that Patty had been gone three months instead of three days.

        Someone who infers that something is the case receives information and forms their own conclusions.

        Same event, different perspectives

        Remember that imply and infer can be used to describe the same event, but that they present this event from different points of view. Take a look at the following two sentences:

        He implied that the General had been a traitor.
        [presented from the writer’s or speaker’s perspective]

        I inferred from his words that the General had been a traitor.
        [presented from the listener’s perspective]

        In the first sentence, the writer or speaker doesn’t actually claim that the General had betrayed his country, but his words (or even his tone) have suggested that this is the case.

        In the second sentence, whatever was said about the General has enabled the listener to deduce that he was in fact a traitor (without the writer or speaker having risked a charge or libel or slander).

      • 69station

        And that sloppy approach to language is what makes it difficult for competent readers to infer what you are trying to imply. The onus is always on the writer to be clear, especially in a direct exchange of opinions.

        Ironically (but with clear relevance) the debate is actually not about whether the use of euphemisms is dishonest (that’s a different discussion and I believe your attempted inference to be incorrect, anyway) but about whether or to what extent ‘comfort women’ is a euphemism.

      • Bruce Chatwin

        infer:

        1 : to derive as a conclusion from facts or premises — compare imply

        2 : guess, surmise

        3 a : to involve as a normal outcome of thoughtb : to point out : indicate

        4 : suggest, hint

      • 69station

        Source please? Plus, just try using infer that way at any credible educational institution from high school up and see how far you get.

        BTW, the word you were looking for is ‘pedantic.’

      • Bruce Chatwin

        Find the source yourself.
        It’s “you’re” not “you”, Earl.
        Arrogant is the word I was looking for, toerag.

      • 69station

        “It’s “you’re” not “you”, Earl.”

        My post contained “your” not “you.” Try reading. AND that was the point, Earl. If you want to misuse like some other illiterates and claim that’s acceptable, then we can make the same case for “your” versus “you’re,” as that happens quite a lot these days among you and your brethren.

      • Bruce Chatwin

        I didn’t infer anything other than that the use of euphemistic language is dishonest.

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • 69station

        Except your chronology is reverse in case 3. And 2 is rather contrived (non-truth would have been better.)

      • KenjiAd

        Fair enough.

        I even concede one point: use of “sex slave” to categorically refer to these women may seem more politically biased than neutral. I get that.

        But I still do believe the vast majority of these women were in fact “slaves” in that they had no freedom to quit their “job” and go home.

        This part, lack of freedom to go home, is not in dispute, my friend.

        Even today, teenage girls working in brothels in US, Canada, should be called “sex slaves” for the same reason.

      • 69station

        “But I still do believe the vast majority of these women were in fact “slaves” in that they had no freedom to quit their “job” and go home.”

        That belief, I hope, has solid foundations, not just what you are inclined to believe without considerable investigation.

        “This part, lack of freedom to go home, is not in dispute, my friend.”

        Yes it is, for many of the cases. But it is very much in dispute. Nobody is saying there weren’t cases like that, but the question is how many and who deprived them of that freedom. We will never, of course, find out for sure.

        “This part, lack of freedom to go home, is not in dispute, my friend.”

        Yes, and Japan, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and the rest of Asia, as well as the rest of the planet, IF (and it’s an important if) they lack the freedom to stop.

        None of this changes the issue that using the term ‘sex slaves’ which by definition means that the subject lacked/lacks the freedom to stop, to cover every case is simply politically motivated and/or intellectually sloppy.

      • KenjiAd

        That belief, I hope, has solid foundations, not just what you are
        inclined to believe without considerable investigation.

        My belief has two “foundations.” One, logic of Occam’s razor and two, lack of evidence (this latter one might be confusing, but I will get to that).

        Because I was trained as a scientist, Occam’s razor is ingrained into my thinking of complex issues like this one. I’m sure you know what “Occam’s razor” means, but for the benefit of readers who may not be familiar with this concept, please first allow me to explain it.

        Occam’s razor means that, when there are many possible explanations, one would take the simplest.

        Now, we are talking about sex workers in 1930’s to 40’s, mainly focused on Korean girls. I know, for fact, that the majority of them were uneducated and illiterate, implying that their families weren’t wealthy. How were they recruited?

        Occam’s razor tells one that they were recruited by a technique similar to those used in Japan. I know. for a fact, that at least in Japan, the majority of prostitutes came from poor families and literally sold by their parents. They signed a loan agreement in the duration of 2-3 years. Parents got the money and the daughters were bound by the pimps until the money got repaid.

        I’m sure you know this is the structure still being used in most of recruitment of teenage prostitutes in poor countries.

        Now recall that most of these girls were illiterate, which would strongly indicate that they had to rely on what they were told, instead of reading the agreement. Did the recruiters and parents lie to the daughters? Most likely.

        And then these daughters were taken to a foreign country, like China. They were then put into a brothel, “asked” to provide services.

        What did these girls do? Guess, my friend.

        My Occam’s razor tells me that initially they resisted, but realizing the futility of their resistance (they couldn’t speak Chinese, no way to go back to Korea), I think they gave up. Some of them might even pretend to be happy, so as to avoid trouble.

        Do we have any proof for what I said above? Well, I don’t. My re-collection of many former Ianfus testimonies are not inconsistent with the narrative above though.

        Now the second part: lack of evidence.

        I have been looking for any evidence, documentary or testimonial, that “Comfort women” requested the release of their duty and got permission to quit their job and went home.

        I have seen a few testimony that they fulfilled the term and then were allowed to go back home. But other than that, I have not seen a single piece of evidence that they were granted a permission to quit the job.

        It’s possible that I haven’t looked hard enough though, so if you know such evidence, please tell. I will trust you.

        So that’s more or less my side of logic.

        In short, I believe the vast majority of Ianfus never had a freedom in the brothels. Therefore, they were “slaves.”

        Because the vast
        majority of respectable scholarship on the subject suggests
        differently.

        Perhaps you can quote them?

      • 69station

        I will revert later on your other points, but for the time being:

        “Perhaps you can quote them?”

        No, they are scholarly texts which require reading, not simply quoting. This of course is far too much effort for most of the posters here, but you are clearly not such a type. The following are recommended:

        In English:

        1. “Comfort Women of the Empire” Park Yuha (easy to find so I have not added more details.) (Also available in Korean and Japanese.)
        There are decent synopses of the book and its evidence. Posting sites here takes too much time, but if you google “Park Yuha book” the search will give you a decent one as first choice. It is called,
        “Summary of Professor Park Yuha’s Book “Comfort Women of the Empire””

        2. C. Sarah Soh, The Comfort Women: Sexual Violence and Postcolonial Memory in Korea and Japan (University of Chicago, 2009).

        In Japanese:

        3. 慰安婦と戦場の性 秦郁彦著 新潮社 1999.6 新潮選書

      • KenjiAd

        That belief, I hope, has solid foundations, not just what you are
        inclined to believe without considerable investigation.

        My belief has two “foundations.” One, logic of Occam’s razor and two, lack of evidence (this latter one might be confusing, but I will get to that).

        Because I was trained as a scientist, Occam’s razor is ingrained into my thinking of complex issues like this one. I’m sure you know what “Occam’s razor” means, but for the benefit of readers who may not be familiar with this concept, please first allow me to explain it.

        Occam’s razor means that, when there are many possible explanations, one would take the simplest.

        Now, we are talking about sex workers in 1930’s to 40’s, mainly focused on Korean girls. I know, for fact, that the majority of them were uneducated and illiterate, implying that their families weren’t wealthy. How were they recruited?

        Occam’s razor tells one that they were recruited by a technique similar to those used in Japan. I know. for a fact, that at least in Japan, the majority of prostitutes came from poor families and literally sold by their parents. They signed a loan agreement in the duration of 2-3 years. Parents got the money and the daughters were bound by the pimps until the money got repaid.

        I’m sure you know this is the structure still being used in most of recruitment of teenage prostitutes in poor countries.

        Now recall that most of these girls were illiterate, which would strongly indicate that they had to rely on what they were told, instead of reading the agreement. Did the recruiters and parents lie to the daughters? Most likely.

        And then these daughters were taken to a foreign country, like China. They were then put into a brothel, “asked” to provide services.

        What did these girls do? Guess, my friend.

        My Occam’s razor tells me that initially they resisted, but realizing the futility of their resistance (they couldn’t speak Chinese, no way to go back to Korea), I think they gave up. Some of them might even pretend to be happy, so as to avoid trouble.

        Do we have any proof for what I said above? Well, I don’t. My re-collection of many former Ianfus testimonies are not inconsistent with the narrative above though.

        Now the second part: lack of evidence.

        I have been looking for any evidence, documentary or testimonial, that “Comfort women” requested the release of their duty and got permission to quit their job and went home.

        I have seen a few testimony that they fulfilled the term and then were allowed to go back home. But other than that, I have not seen a single piece of evidence that they were granted a permission to quit the job.

        It’s possible that I haven’t looked hard enough though, so if you know such evidence, please tell. I will trust you.

        So that’s more or less my side of logic.

        In short, I believe the vast majority of Ianfus never had a freedom in the brothels. Therefore, they were “slaves.”

        Because the vast
        majority of respectable scholarship on the subject suggests
        differently.

        Perhaps you can quote them?

      • Jam Awns

        You are perfectly wrong because of Business instruction.
        *Office/factory workers are supported to work for their task. Boss orders employees to fulfill the task.
        *Soldiers are supposed to fight against enemies in the battle field. Commander orders soldiers to fight and kill the enemies.
        *Comfort women are supposed to work for their duty.
        Brothel owner orders high-paid professional prostitutes to attain their goal.

      • GIJ

        “However, most of that respected scholarship indicates that the latter cases were in a small minority”

        The phrase “respected scholarship” is problematic and not really persuasive. Respected by whom, exactly? The people who respect this scholarship aren’t universally respected themselves. All scholarship on this issue is suspect, that is the problem. Nobody, absolutely nobody, has an objective view on the Korean sex slave issue.

        And the more people like Kishida protest in their ineffective way, the more likely people are to insistently use the phrase “sex slave.”

      • 69station

        I was referring to historical scholarship which is considered intellectually and methodically sound by a vast majority of fellow historians. Professor Park is a good example: for all the criticism she is getting in Korea from the media and politicians, there is no criticism from fellow historians regarding her methods and sources.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • 69station

        “Most professional historians are hardly objective….” depends on which professional historians you are referring to. Those in respected academic institutions, whilst they may have certain inclinations in their interpretations, have to open their scholarship to scrutiny both others with a vested interest in proving them wrong. History as an academic discipline as just as rigo(u)rous and any other social science and comes close to the rigo(u)r of the natural sciences. Those media figures who style themselves as historians certainly are not objective, indeed, the law of media interest usually means they have a vested interest in not being so. (Park is indisputably of the former type, ask any professional academic historian, in fact, ask those professional historians who disagree with her interpretation, they will say the same.)

        Don’t know where you you got my interpretation from, as I have not stated it.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • GIJ

        Well, so what? Most professional historians are hardly objective, no matter how strongly some among them insist they are, so I’m not sure why you think their assessment of Park’s work settles this matter in favor of the interpretation that you prefer.

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • 69station

        That’s right: if they entered paid work voluntarily, they weren’t slaves. That’s not what the term slaves means.

        Responsibility? Whose responsibility? All the guilty parties are now dead.

      • Jonathan Fields

        You. You personally. You are responsible. And they were slaves. If your parents sell you into slavery, the slavers aren’t off the hook because someone got money.

      • Jonathan Fields

        You. You personally. You are responsible. And they were slaves. If your parents sell you into slavery, the slavers aren’t off the hook because someone got money.

      • 69station

        I, the person writing this post, am responsible for what happened to those women 60 years ago? You are getting incoherent. Been drinking? (Nothing wrong with that per se, but better to post when you are capable of thinking straight.)

        But to take part of your post, we agree: if you were sold into servitude, you were a slave. Not that I said anything different, but,as you seem to be acting irrationally, I guess that’s why you think I did otherwise.

      • Jonathan Fields

        It’s sarcasm. You seem to think because individuals who committed crimes are dead that everyone is off the hook. Individuals may have committed the crimes, but the damage they did is still very real. Japan seems to think that all that stuff can just be swept under the rug. It cannot.

      • 69station

        ”You seem to think because individuals who committed crimes are dead that everyone is off the hook.”

        You might want to re-examine that sentence. Who is everyone, if not the people who committed the crimes?

        “Individuals may have committed the crimes, but the damage they did is still very real.”

        So let’s just blame some people who had nothing to do with it? Replace one injustice with another, to satisfy your personal inclinations?

        “Japan seems to think that all that stuff can just be swept under the rug.”

        (As one poster above has pointed also pointed out) who is “Japan”?

        Note: all questions in this post are rhetorical.

      • Jonathan Fields

        I’m not sure you’re worth dealing with anymore given your very tenuous grasp on how history and the study thereof should work. You also need to work on your reading comprehension. I’m sure you thought your rhetorical questions were rather clever, but they don’t really address what I said at all. Good day, uyoku warcrime denier.

      • 69station

        Then enlighten me.

      • Jonathan Fields

        Well I’m president of a historical society, and the historians I talk to every day say you dress funny.

        This comment is every bit as meaningful as yours just was.

      • 69station

        So many comments, so little content. If you think I don’t understand then please, tell me about how the study of history ‘should’ work. As I said, in order to get a degree in history, I was obliged to read, think, discuss, and pass tests on such questions of historiography, and in my weekly discussions with social and political historians of Japan (who are not Japanese and are employed both at universities in Japan and overseas), I think I have a pretty good idea of the generally accepted answers to such questions (among professional historians, that is.) But, of course, I may have missed something. So, to satisfy my curiosity, and for the benefit of third parties who may never have had to consider such questions, please spell it out for us.

        If you can’t do that, there’s nothing more to discuss.

      • Jonathan Fields

        I know you’re not a historian because of the way you struggle with difficult topics. I have a hard time believing any historian would agree that responsibility for an event dies with the perpetrators. It’s a silly thing to say, and you devalue your university’s diplomas every time you say it.

      • 69station

        “I have a hard time believing any historian would agree that responsibility for an event dies with the perpetrators.”

        Wow. I mean, WOW.

        Just try this then: try to get anyone who was not alive at the time a crime was committed prosecuted for it, in any recognized, civilized court of law. Anywhere in a democracy.

        I can only imagine that we are using the term ‘responsibility’ in such different ways that we are miscommunication to the highest degree.

      • Jonathan Fields

        Ok. You’re clearly being obtuse on purpose. Goodbye.

      • 69station

        That’s right: if they entered paid work voluntarily, they weren’t slaves. That’s not what the term slaves means.

        Responsibility? Whose responsibility? All the guilty parties are now dead.

      • 69station

        That’s right: if they entered paid work voluntarily, they weren’t slaves. That’s not what the term slaves means.

        Responsibility? Whose responsibility? All the guilty parties are now dead.

      • 69station

        That’s right: if they entered paid work voluntarily, they weren’t slaves. That’s not what the term slaves means.

        Responsibility? Whose responsibility? All the guilty parties are now dead.

      • 69station

        That’s right: if they entered paid work voluntarily, they weren’t slaves. That’s not what the term slaves means.

        Responsibility? Whose responsibility? All the guilty parties are now dead.

      • R0ninX3ph

        But….. Japanese people arent a different ethnicity to the rest of North East Asia…

      • R0ninX3ph

        But….. Japanese people arent a different ethnicity to the rest of North East Asia…

      • R0ninX3ph

        But….. Japanese people arent a different ethnicity to the rest of North East Asia…

      • R0ninX3ph

        But….. Japanese people arent a different ethnicity to the rest of North East Asia…

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

      • Jonathan Fields

        “They weren’t technically slaves because people of another ethnicity sold them to us. Also some of them were paid, so it’s totally cool.” That’s a really convenient way to dodge responsibility. Maybe America can finally get over its own history of slavery by using similar logic.

        /Sarcasm

    • createpeace

      They could bought diamonds and a house. They went to picnic, too. There are nice photos of them dressed well and smiling.
      The brothels needed cv of the girls to show the army that the girls were over 20 y o. There were name lists of the workers, too.

  • Fred Orangefield

    Is this the clearest sign yet so far that The Japan Times is a propaganda paper for anti-Abe camp?

    Why trusting the testimony by those old women that are proven to be inconsistent and untrustworthy?
    Why ignoring the fact that fraud and perjury that are so common in that country?
    Why ignoring the fact that there is no record / evidence of the men — very strong and powerful — defended those girls if they were kidnapped by force?
    Why ignoring the fact that there is a official US-Army report describing what they were during the WW2?
    Why siding with the views of Asahi Shimbun who retracted their reports 17 months ago? Wasn’t it the case that the Yoshida Testimony was all made up?

    It seems that this is the end of The Japan Times.

  • Malaysian Expat

    It is a complex issue. Some can qualify as sex slaves. Some are comfort women. The same thing is still happening worldwide at almost all the cities.

    Aren’t we a bit naive to expect our media or politician to be capable of complex thinking?

    • Fred Orangefield

      You are right. I am just so sad that Japanese media, like this one, is too childish.

  • Jam Awns

    Japan times shouldn’t mislead world citizens. Comfort women are not sex slaves. Even U.S. official paper in 1944 recorded them as high-priced camp followers.
    Comfort women dedicated to raise soldiers’ morale and spirits, and to prevent rape crimes in countries. Comfort women are not sex slaves as the same as soldiers are not bloodthirsty killers.
    The word ‘sex slaves’ humiliates comfort women’s pride as the same as the word ‘bloodthirsty killers’ does solders’ honor. Such wording obviously mislead real features.
    Comfort woman earned monthly income as much as soldier’s annual income. Dedication of comfort woman was priceless as same as dedication of soldier was precious. Duty of comfort women was horrible such as extraordinary repeating prostitution, while duty of soldier was cruel such as murder.

  • Jam Awns

    S.Korean government is supposed to continue making effort to remove offensive comfort women statues finally and irreversibly, and must keep her words, focus on actually helping out and appreciate the women who had dedicated to raise Imperial Japanese soldiers’ spirits and morale.
    The comfort women as a result defend Korean peninsula against Marxism and economic crisis today as well as had greatly contributed to S.Korean miracle economic growth in the past.
    S.Korea must realize that the offensive statues of the comfort woman have been and will be the symbol of S.Korean betray, perjury and calumny.
    The S.Korean government foundation is not only for S.Korean comfort women. Japan supports the foundation with a one-time contribution, and S. Korea takes accountability for searching the truth by focusing on fact and investigation at interest groups who makes perjury and calumny for money and Marxism but for comfort women.

    Park Chung Hee: Problems in regard to property and claims between Japan and Korea have been settled completely and finally.
    Kim Young Sam:S.Korea does not require compensation for comfort women issue
    Kim Dae-jung: Japan has apologized, and I have accepted it.
    Roh Moo-hyun: Historical issue never be talked during my period.
    Lee Myung-bak: S.Korea does not require apology on Japan.
    Park Geun Hye: S.Korea confirms that the issue is resolved finally and irreversibly.

    Japan had fulfilled responsibility completely and finally.

    • KenjiAd

      the women who had dedicated to raise Imperial Japanese soldiers’ spirits and morale. The
      comfort women as a result defend Korean peninsula against Marxism …

      I was almost expecting you close your post with “Tennou Heika Banzai!” Anyway, you must be smoking something really strong.

      • Jam Awns

        You can challenge me logically if you can, and shouldn’t make stupid slur any more.

      • KenjiAd

        You mean, you were not under the influence when you wrote that crap? I was giving too much benefit of the doubt then.

      • Bruce Chatwin

        The irony of course is that the emperor is appalled by and despises the likes of Jam, Fred, Johnnie, and their fellow travellers

    • TV Monitor

      S.Korean government is supposed to continue making effort to remove offensive comfort women statues finally

      You are a victim of Japanese domestic propaganda.

      Look at the text of agreement, nowhere does it say the statue would be moved. It only mentions that the ROK government would have talks with the organizations that put it there and the organizations already rejected the possibility of relocating the statue, and the ROK government affirmed they had no legal authority to change the status of the statue, so it is already concluded that the statue isn’t going anywhere.

      • johnniewhite

        and you are what propaganda? CCP? JCP?

      • 69station

        All well and good, but the same argument applies to governmental agreements between Japan and Korea made over 50 years ago, whereby the latter has agreed that all matters relating to the colonization of Korea and the second world war had been settled, in return for financial payment.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Fred Orangefield

        You are a victim of Asahi Shimbun’s propaganda.

      • Malaysian Expat

        So childish.

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • Malaysian Expat

        I can think of two, Japan and Vietnam, and may be Australia and Canada too where there is a large Vietnamese community. We simply need someone to remind them of the atrocities committed by the South Korean soldiers.

        But then the Vietnamese people are not as childish and so you may be right. Only in Korea…

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        I can think of two, Japan and Vietnam,

        Vietnam will not, because they know better than anyone what Japanese rightwingers claim is BS and never happened.

      • Malaysian Expat

        I may have to agree.

        Nobody is as gullible and emotionally hysterical as your countrymen.

      • Malaysian Expat

        I can think of two, Japan and Vietnam, and may be Australia and Canada too where there is a large Vietnamese community. We simply need someone to remind them of the atrocities committed by the South Korean soldiers.

        But then the Vietnamese people are not as childish and so you may be right. Only in Korea…

      • Malaysian Expat

        I can think of two, Japan and Vietnam, and may be Australia and Canada too where there is a large Vietnamese community. We simply need someone to remind them of the atrocities committed by the South Korean soldiers.

        But then the Vietnamese people are not as childish and so you may be right. Only in Korea…

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

      • TV Monitor

        Netouyo Expat

        Should I sponsor a statue of a Vietnamese girl outside South Korea consulate?

        Please do, because no nation with the sole exception of Japan is willing to host such a statute.

  • Fred Orangefield

    I have questions to the author of this article.

    * Why trusting the testimony by those old women that are proven to be inconsistent and untrustworthy?
    * Why ignoring the fact that fraud and perjury that are so common in that country?
    * Why ignoring the fact that there is no record / evidence of the men — very strong and powerful — defended those girls if they were kidnapped by force?
    * Why ignoring the fact that there is a official US-Army report describing what they were during the WW2?
    * Why siding with the views of Asahi Shimbun who retracted their reports 17 months ago?

    * Wasn’t it the case that the Yoshida Testimony was all made up?

    • KenjiAd

      You set up a whole army of straw-men. Your questions are based on the assumptions that are not valid.

      • Jam Awns

        These questions are very direct fundamental questions.
        As long as JT makes readers blind from the basic questions, it seems that this is the end of The Japan Times.

      • KenjiAd

        Your questions were already answered. Straw-man nonsense.

      • johnniewhite

        I disagree. Those questions must be asked in the process. It’s the process of verification. It is not right to just hear the claims of the former comfort women when we know that there is no independent witness for them. On the contrary, there is record of their testimony being changed several times, some giving mentions of Jeep, Helicopter, Christmas, etc., that clearly do not support their claims.

      • johnniewhite

        I disagree. Those questions must be asked in the process. It’s the process of verification. It is not right to just hear the claims of the former comfort women when we know that there is no independent witness for them. On the contrary, there is record of their testimony being changed several times, some giving mentions of Jeep, Helicopter, Christmas, etc., that clearly do not support their claims.

      • KenjiAd

        I can now see you have never done any kind of research, history or otherwise. In other words, you don’t even know what you are “disagreeing” with. Nope, reading some garbage blogs on the Internet isn’t research.

        Someone’s testimony is expected to be inconsistent, especially if you are dealing with emotionally charged memories spoken by old people who never had proper education.

        The original poster, perhaps one of your aliases, framed the issue around the question of whether testimonies of former Ianfus are reliable or not. You used the phrase “Why trust…”?

        That’s straw-man, because historian’s job is not “trust” or “ignore” certain people or facts. That’s for amateurs like you, who can pick and choose what to believe. Historian’s job is to interpret each data, based not just on the information at hand (documents, testimonies, etc), but also on various historical contexts surrounding the event.

        Historians do have biases which undoubtedly influence their narrative. But that’s inevitable.

        By doing so, historian’s are hoping to extract the truth.

      • johnniewhite

        So, in your mind, the research in this topic involves interviewing the former comfort women, and nothing else? Not considering the culture of their society from which their testimony would be coloured?

        Historical research has to be holistic. Any pieces of evidence will need to be examined from multiple angles and pieced together. From this process emerges a nuanced picture of historical truth.

      • johnniewhite

        So, in your mind, the research in this topic involves interviewing the former comfort women, and nothing else? Not considering the culture of their society from which their testimony would be coloured?

        Historical research has to be holistic. Any pieces of evidence will need to be examined from multiple angles and pieced together. From this process emerges a nuanced picture of historical truth.

  • Jam Awns

    Japan times shouldn’t mislead world citizens. Comfort women are not sex slaves. Even U.S. official paper in 1944 recorded them as high-priced camp followers.

    Comfort women dedicated to raise soldiers’ morale and spirits, and to prevent rape crimes in countries. Comfort women are not sex slaves as the same as soldiers are not bloodthirsty killers.

    The word ‘sex slaves’ humiliates comfort women’s pride as the same as the word ‘bloodthirsty killers’ does solders’ honor. Such wording obviously mislead real features.

    Comfort woman earned monthly income as much as soldier’s annual income. Dedication of comfort woman was priceless as same as dedication of soldier was precious. Duty of comfort women was horrible such as extraordinary repeating prostitution, while duty of soldier was cruel such as murder.

    • mayday

      > “Even U.S. official paper in 1944 recorded them as high-priced camp followers.”

      If we are being intellectually honest, it needs to be pointed out that the US report was based on a small sample of 20 comfort women from a single location.

      The US report (Report #49) also specifically stated: “On the basis of these false representations many girls enlisted for overseas duty and were rewarded with an advance of a few hundred yen. The majority of the girls were ignorant and uneducated, although a few had been connected with oldest profession on earth before.”

      The upside is that the report stated their living conditions were good with weekly checkup from doctor, and that most would be allowed to return home after repaying their debt in 1943. There were also numerous proposals of marriage from Japanese soldiers.

      So in short, I generally agree with the opinions from other posters above that this is not a black/white issue. Any one-sided blanket statement would be an oversimplification.

      • johnniewhite

        I agree in principle that the CWI should be examined holistically. It is important to look at a whole range of evidence. A wide-ranging questions Fred Orangefield posed should be addressed as a matter of course. Without doing so, the claim of Mr Reiji Yoshida does not sound credible.

  • mayu mama

    Sex Worker(Prostitute) and Sex Slaves are not the same.

    Prostitution is the business or practice of engaging in sexual relations in exchange for payment or some other benefit.

    Forced prostitution is a crime against the person because of the violation of the victim’s rights of movement through coercion and because of their commercial exploitation.

    “Forced prostitution” is a shocking phrase.

    “Sex slave” is a more shocking phrase.

    What did you imagine when you heard word “sex slave”?

    Media representations affect our views of particular social groups or issues.

    Human rights are not a sword to smite good intentions.

    An appeal to pity attempts to persuade using emotion-specifically, sympathy-rather than evidence.

    Poverty and lack of educational and economic opportunities in one’s hometown may lead women to voluntarily migrate and then be involuntarily trafficked into sex work.

    Korean government pays so great attention to the past comfort women while it ignores the present-day Korean women who are compelled to become sex slave because of their dire situation of being deeply in debt.

    • johnniewhite

      More and more people come to realise the media manipulation of politics, thanks to internet.

  • TV Monitor

    So the agreement is already terminated. With Kishida and Abe’s denial, it wasn’t going to hold.

    • johnniewhite

      Not a denial. Clarification.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

      • R0ninX3ph

        “That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.”

        Surely it is a two-way street though? Comfort women/Prostitutes didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

        Either way, a lot of “prostitutes” in nowadays are not free to leave their “chosen” profession, so why would we assume that the world was far more progressive 70 years ago in a fascist wartime regime?

      • Tachomanx

        Since neither can be certain of what happened at the time and the specific circumstances of each or a majority of individuals in that situation is best to keep the current terms and let anyone make whatever they want from them.

      • R0ninX3ph

        The problem is that “comfort women” is a euphemism already. So, we should create a new term, how about “WHMOMNHBCOMHBP” “Women who may or may not have been coerced or might have been prostitutes”.

        How about “WWCBSWC” “Women we can’t be sure weren’t coerced”.

      • Tachomanx

        Now you are being ridiculous.

        Have it your way buddy.

      • R0ninX3ph

        I’m just saying, why is using a euphemism okay? Oh, because it paints wartime brothels in a better light? Right.

        Anyone under the impression that even “professional” prostitutes were free to leave the “comfort stations” whenever they wanted, is delusional. A slave isn’t only a slave if they are unpaid, they are a slave if they have no choice.

        Are child workers in sweatshops not slaves because they get paid? Or is that different because its children?

      • Tachomanx

        As I said, you are getting ridiculous, so whatever.

        You won’t consider anything I reply so I won’t bother.
        Just remember there is a couple of things called context and background that give meaning to the things we say and refer to.

      • Tachomanx

        Since neither can be certain of what happened at the time and the specific circumstances of each or a majority of individuals in that situation is best to keep the current terms and let anyone make whatever they want from them.

      • R0ninX3ph

        “That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.”

        Surely it is a two-way street though? Comfort women/Prostitutes didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

        Either way, a lot of “prostitutes” in nowadays are not free to leave their “chosen” profession, so why would we assume that the world was far more progressive 70 years ago in a fascist wartime regime?

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

    • Tachomanx

      Haven’t heard the korean side exploding in anger and backing down from this.

      Why?
      Because this is a clarification on the terminology applied to this case as is a fact that not all “comfort women” were taken against their will. Some actually were offered the job and they agreed. That’s why the term is vague in definition as sex slaves didn’t apply to all, perhaps not even a majority of the women involved.

      Second and most important, is that Park and her party sorely want this deal to come through as to see the matter ended for good and score a badly needed political victory among it’s usual constituents (middle age and seniors for the most part and who approve of this deal according to polls)

      Third, Japan also considers this deal important which is why Abe has been clamping down on critics and forcing withdrawals of inflamatory comments as to not see it derailed.

      Finally, both sides finally came to understand that this is likely the last chance to solve the issue and understand that neither can get all they wish for, so they settled with a deal midways to move on at long last.

  • Fred Orangefield

    I cannot help noticing that the initial of the author may perhaps be “S”, and not “R”. Do you know what I mean?

  • Eiji Suzuki

    Is “The Japan Times” a real Japanese media, or is it just one of many “Pretending as Japanese” media?

    • johnniewhite

      In my mind they have long been a wing of Asahi Shimbun.

      • Kayo Kanako Kimura

        It’s not just in your mind. Their sales network is actually in the Asahi Shimbun group!

    • Kayo Kanako Kimura

      The Japan Times was founded by a British man in the Meiji period, which was a time when Westerners looked down on Japan and Japanese. It was the foreigners living in Japan at the time which wrote many which misunderstood and also insulted Japanese culture. It is a proper Japanese newspaper, but I have heard from personal reliable sources that the foreign reporters/employees do not associate with Japanese employees. They live in a sort of exclusive community for themselves only, so when someone Japanese starts working in the Japan Times hoping to make foreign friends, they are usually immediately discouraged. I have no intention to criticize foreigners who choose to stick to their own people, but I believe that’s one of the reasons why Japan Times foreign reporters cannot, do not, and tries not to understand Japan nor the Japanese public correctly. Many people outside Japan have the wrong idea that many of the articles expresses how Japan and Japanese are, while they are only based on foreigner’s views. I have several non-Japanese friends who have read articles in the Japan Times who know many of them do not have correct info on Japan (and they are knocking themselves out making fun of the reporters who wrote them). IMHO, I don’t think they ever changed much since the Meiji period.

      • blondein_tokyo

        How do you know the Japan Times reporters “do not understand the Japanese public”? And, how do you know that they “stick to their own people” and don’t have any Japanese friends at all? You can’t possibly know that.
        If one is writing about culture, getting the exact nuances of culture might in fact be difficult, and mistakes can be made. But this article is not about culture. It is factual. It is a cold hard fact that the Japanese military kept women as sex slaves. There is no possibility that this article is indicative of a mistaken understanding of the Japanese people. More likely you simply do not like seeing Japan criticized, and are attempting to poison the well with an ad hominem attack against the Japan Times.

      • Kayo Kanako Kimura

        >How do you know the Japan Times reporters “do not understand the Japanese public”? And, how do you know that they “stick to their own people” and don’t have any Japanese friends at all? You can’t possibly know that.

        I know that because I have a friend who’s been working at the Japan Times for decades, and that friend once gave me a very thorough description of how things are there. Whether or not you choose to believe this is up to you though.

        Now, could you plz present some concrete evidence which proves the sex slave accusations are a ‘cold hard fact’? Mind you, don’t bother quoting any testimonies by ex-comfort women as proof. I assume you will most likely say what I wrote about the Japan Times is mere hearsay. If so, fine. But all the same, most of what has been written by English media on comfort women issues are based on hearsay as well. I do not know of any proper trial in which victim’s testimonies were treated as evidence. If testimonies can stand as proof, any woman can scream rape so to have an innocent man’s life ruined. I’m sure you can understand that much logic, so I am looking forward to you presenting other solid and objective type of evidence such as first degree historical documents which show the Japanese army was operating on a scheme to enslave Korean women for sexual purposes. You won’t find anything much in Korean ex-comfort women testimonies anyways, because almost all of them were not capable of understanding Japanese at the time they were sold, tricked, coerced etc. to work in comfort stations, meaning they could never have been able to make out if it was really the Japanese army which was behind it all. I do not doubt at all that there were women who were made to work in those stations against their wills and I do feel very sorry for them. But to my knowledge there has been nothing which can prove it was the Japanese army which deliberately forced the women into such misery. The only case in which Japanese soldiers were found guilty of doing such a thing was in the Semarang case, but those soldiers acted on their own. So when it came out into the open, they were punished by the Japanese army and it was also the Japanese army which freed the victims. This case shows that the Japanese army was totally against treating women in such ways. Do present me evidence why I should believe otherwise. I can take criticism on Japan, as long as it’s based on the truth. I criticize lots of things about Japan myself. If you can present me some kind of concrete evidence on what you believe is true which I can find convincing enough, I will gladly admit my views were wrong and you were right.

      • blondein_tokyo

        “they were sold, tricked, coerced etc. to work in comfort stations”

        “I do not doubt at all that there were women who were made to work in
        those stations against their wills and I do feel very sorry for them.”

        Then you agree they were sex slaves. So why are you so bent on arguing with me?

      • Kayo Kanako Kimura

        Is this your response when I ask you to present some evidence on why you believe the Japanese army directly enslaved Korean women sexually on purpose? I already told you I do not doubt that some ex-comfort women were made to work in comfort stations against their wills. The issue here is who actually put them in such situations. Your claim is that it was the Japanese army, and as I have not been able to find any proof which suggests that’s true, I asked you to provide any for me. Do you not understand that? You’re not stupid, of course you do. You’re only avoiding to reply to my question because you have no proof whatsoever. And plz…I’m not the one who started some argument with you. I posted my views and what I happened to know about the Japan Times, and then it was YOU who started accusing me as if I was lying, and you used that to make it seem like you were all correct in saying the Japanese army sexually enslaved was a fact. If that’s your opinion, fine. But if you can’t deal with my arguing with your theory, just go write your opinions independently without trying to make me or any other person who has different views look bad.

      • blondein_tokyo

        Actually, no – I did not claim anywhere in either of my posts that “it was the Japanese army” who was responsible for recruiting the women.

        It was, however, the Japanese army who held them captive and raped them.

        As for what you think you know about the Japan Times, it really is a moot point. First because it is something you can’t possibly know; secondly because having an understanding of Japanese culture is not a prerequisite for writing about history. While culture can be amorphous and subjective, history is factual and not subject to opinion. This story is factual, and if you want to dispute it, then it is you who is going to need to explain exactly which points the author got wrong, and why they are wrong. You haven’t done anything so far other than to make baseless, general accusations of bias. I invite you to point out exactly which parts of this story are false, and I suggest that instead of complaining about the errors to the forum, that you contract the editor directly. After all, you seem to have important contacts at the Japan Times, so it should be possible for you to do that. Get the story pulled, and then I will be quite happy to apologize to you in full, and in public.

      • Kayo Kanako Kimura

        Oh whatever. I don’t want nor need your apology. You’re free to believe in what you prefer to believe in, just as I do as well. If you think understanding the cultures of a country isn’t needed to understand it’s history, what do you care whether the Japan Times doesn’t understand Japan or not? I have already made clear why I think the use of ‘sex slave’ is wrong in another comment outside this thread. You happened to start mocking me here, where I was focusing on something different. I simply do not agree with your views, esp when you say there is no need to understand the cultures of a country in order to acknowledge it’s true history. I think it’s possible to have an overall understanding of what happened in the past like which countries had war and which of them won, but when it comes to more accurate details of how people lived and what their values were in times we have not experienced for ourselves, I totally think it’s necessary to have proper understanding for cultural, ethnic, religious, etc. backgrounds. That’s how I think, and I do not intend to force you to think the same if you do not agree. I wrote a comment on the Japan Times and you claimed I was lying, so I had to respond. Since you did not bring that subject up again, I was okay with exchanging opinions with you, but you brought it up again, so I’m done talking with you.

      • blondein_tokyo

        I did not say, “understanding the cultures of a country isn’t needed to understand it’s history”. I said that culture can be amorphous and subjective, but history is factual and ***not subject to opinion***.

        In other words, when researching and writing about history, one will consider culture as a factor in how and why events unfolded, but that is all.

        For example, it’s not an OPINION that these “comfort women” were held captive and raped, it’s a fact. That fact is not changed by understanding that in the culture of the time, it was seen as justifiable to sell your daughter into sexual slavery.

        In addition, the fact that the word “sex slave” applies to what happened to these women is also not an OPINION. Words have meaning, and the definition of “sex slave” fits this situation.

        “I wrote a comment on the Japan Times and you claimed I was lying”

        I didn’t say you were lying. I questioned whether your claim was accurate, and that is not the same thing. I believe that you had a friend working at JT, and I believe he told you this. But I do question the veracity of this claim, considering how outlandish it is. You never really did explain how it is possible that none of the foreign reporters at the JT office have any Japanese friends, none can speak Japanese, and all live in some sort of bubble where they have no interaction with Japanese people on a daily basis all while living in Japan for many years.

        It just doesn’t make logical sense at all to say that people can live in Japan and write for a Japanese newspaper and yet not know anything about Japanese culture.

    • joshben

      NY TIMES publishes JT. This is not Japanese media.

      NY TIMES have been running the racism to Japan. They praised Manhattan Project and claimed the massacre of Japanese. NYT praised the aggression in Asia by U.S. and Europe. Now, they put responsibility on Japan for the U.S.’s act of aggression.

      • blondein_tokyo

        I’m sorry, but are you saying that this article is racist? How exactly did you come to that conclusion? Criticism and racism are not analogous.

  • Charley

    “…reached a landmark agreement…”

    They reached an agreement that didn’t include the opinions of the victims.

    • Fred Orangefield

      Yes, you are right. In this context, the victims means those ladies who were exploited by the activist organisation in Korea.

    • Fred Orangefield

      Yes, you are right. In this context, the victims means those ladies who were exploited by the activist organisation in Korea.

      • Bruce Chatwin

        I think Charley meant the victims of The Recreation and Amusement Association (特殊慰安施設協会). Japan’s then ruling class coerced, cajoled and tricked young Japanese into prostitution at brothels set up by the Japanese government in 1945.

    • Fred Orangefield

      Yes, you are right. In this context, the victims means those ladies who were exploited by the activist organisation in Korea.

    • Fred Orangefield

      Yes, you are right. In this context, the victims means those ladies who were exploited by the activist organisation in Korea.

    • Fred Orangefield

      Yes, you are right. In this context, the victims means those ladies who were exploited by the activist organisation in Korea.

  • tisho

    I suggest JapanTimes moderators start banning people who deny and substantially praise sex slavery, otherwise you may lose your good quality audience.

    • Fred Orangefield

      ha ha ha!
      Do you mean this? — I suggest The Japan Times’ moderators start banning those who expose the historical truths behind the propaganda?

  • GIJ

    “It is the policy of The Japan Times that ‘sex slaves’ is acceptable for referring to the women who were forced to provide sex for Japanese troops before and during World War II.”

    Well that’s good to know. What term is acceptable to the folks at the Sankei Shimbun? Gold-digging non-coerced pleasure seekers?

  • Bruce Chatwin

    oldspeak: innocent victim
    newspeak: collateral damage

    oldspeak: sex slaves
    newspeak: comfort women

  • Bruce Chatwin

    oldspeak: innocent victim
    newspeak: collateral damage

    oldspeak: sex slaves
    newspeak: comfort women

  • Tangerine 18

    I see the sex-slave trolls and sock puppets are on display once again for everyone to see. They are such sad people, like elderly Nazis trying to tell the world that the Holocaust didn’t happen, or that they were misunderstood.
    The world knows the truth ( thanks in part to memoirs from people like Nakasone and the founder of Fuji-Sankei ) and no amount of cheap anti-Korean lies on the internet will ever change that.

  • Tangerine 18

    I see the sex-slave trolls and sock puppets are on display once again for everyone to see. They are such sad people, like elderly Nazis trying to tell the world that the Holocaust didn’t happen, or that they were misunderstood.
    The world knows the truth ( thanks in part to memoirs from people like Nakasone and the founder of Fuji-Sankei ) and no amount of cheap anti-Korean lies on the internet will ever change that.

  • Tangerine 18

    I see the sex-slave trolls and sock puppets are on display once again for everyone to see. They are such sad people, like elderly Nazis trying to tell the world that the Holocaust didn’t happen, or that they were misunderstood.
    The world knows the truth ( thanks in part to memoirs from people like Nakasone and the founder of Fuji-Sankei ) and no amount of cheap anti-Korean lies on the internet will ever change that.

  • CaptainAsia

    The official name is “comfort women” because they were all not forced into selling their bodies. Many of them joined voluntarily for money and food. Even Koreans accept this. Meanwhile South Korea for all its rhetoric fails to fix the much larger problem of Han Lai Dan in Vietnam, that is disgraceful and highly hypocritical. Shame on you Korea.

  • Tachomanx

    A tabloid again?
    Can’t really consider such a short news article as actual news buddy.

    Anyway, the deal marches on and soon we can all move on towards more important and actually pressing issues.

    • TV Monitor

      Tachomanx

      A tabloid again?

      KBS is no more tabloid than NHK is.

    • TV Monitor

      Tachomanx

      A tabloid again?

      KBS is no more tabloid than NHK is.

      • Tachomanx

        Considering how little the article actually explained and the length of it, yeah, a tabloid you take for actual news. Like always.

      • TV Monitor

        Tachomanx

        LOL, so everything is tabloid according to you.

      • johnniewhite

        TV Monitor

        The word tabloid was used probably because he thinks your argument is limited within the intellectual scope of that medium. But I do not think so. I think you write like the Asahi Shimbun, a ‘quality’ paper.

      • johnniewhite

        TV Monitor

        The word tabloid was used probably because he thinks your argument is limited within the intellectual scope of that medium. But I do not think so. I think you write like the Asahi Shimbun, a ‘quality’ paper.

      • TV Monitor

        johnniewhite

        No, Tachomanx was discrediting KBS as a tabloid because he didn’t look at the source. That’s like calling BBC a tabloid.

      • Tachomanx

        Considering your past links to issues such as the comfort women deal, the so called shadow draft for the japanese military and others; I consider that what YOU post usually comes from such unreliable sources since you fail to always point to a major news outlet, and the fact that your a racist warmonger as well.

      • Tachomanx

        Considering how little the article actually explained and the length of it, yeah, a tabloid you take for actual news. Like always.

  • Clickonthewhatnow

    I found something showing the apology in 2001, and then Park’s statement that the apology “drove a stake through the heart of South Korea”. Huh. Sounds like South Korea has politicians who muck things up just as Japan does. Good thing that politician isn’t the head of the country now. But hey, we shouldn’t hold South Korea responsible for dumb things their politicians said after apologies were made, especially when they become president. But let’s hold anything that Japanese politicians say after apologies were made against them.

    Dur?

    • bumfromkorea

      Except Park herself paid her respects at the tomb of Ho Chi Minh in 2013 as atonement for her previous positions as well as yet another gesture of atonement.

      Buddy, apologists who are thousand times smarter and better informed than you have already made your arguments years ago, and lost. I’m basically reciting these rebuttals from memory.

      • Clickonthewhatnow

        Buddy, I dig how when taking a shot at my intelligence, you show the lack of yours. That’s cute.

      • bumfromkorea

        Sure. Whatever you say. Got another apologist argument to recycle?

      • Clickonthewhatnow

        No more than you know what your mistake was, likely. Go on, slam my intelligence again, just make sure to mess up again when you do.

      • bumfromkorea

        So that’s a ‘no’ then. Very well, carry on. Tenno heika banzai! ;)

      • Clickonthewhatnow

        Cool! Still haven’t figured it out, then! Fantastic. Not very bright, though. Pity, that.

      • Clickonthewhatnow

        Cool! Still haven’t figured it out, then! Fantastic. Not very bright, though. Pity, that.

      • bumfromkorea

        So that’s a ‘no’ then. Very well, carry on. Tenno heika banzai! ;)

      • createpeace

        What can’t you accept japan’s apology? You only accept Korea’s apology. Korea teaches hate in school. Is that why?

      • bumfromkorea

        First, I didn’t go to school in Korea.

        Second, you wanna know why Koreans are having trouble accepting Japan’s apology? Because 17 days after Japan’s latest apologies, a Diet member (who is also the representative of Tokyo 2020) called comfort women prostitutes again. When I punch you in the face, apologize, and call you a whiny little b**** who deserved it 17 days later, my apology really shouldn’t count.

        Third, are you seriously asking that question in a comment section of an article titled “Japan’s foreign minister challenges use of ‘sex slaves’ term for ‘comfort women’”? You wanna know why apologies aren’t accepted? Read the article again.

      • createpeace

        The use of the word is for protecting Korea from the potential war in Asia.
        Didn’t you know that? Japan has admitted Korea telling a lie for more then 60years. Korea started the lie since then and it still continues. It is not just the story of now.
        Korea also deceived Japan about the world national heritage. This kind of breaking promises between the countries are always caused by Korea. You are the person who ignore these every facts and punch and insult people.

      • createpeace

        and Nkorean schools in japan also teach hate and ask japanese government money. they blieve that they should be paid like japanese public shool. no other schools run by foreign countries ask money though.

      • createpeace

        What can’t you accept japan’s apology? You only accept Korea’s apology. Korea teaches hate in school. Is that why?

  • Clickonthewhatnow

    I found something showing the apology in 2001, and then Park’s statement that the apology “drove a stake through the heart of South Korea”. Huh. Sounds like South Korea has politicians who muck things up just as Japan does. Good thing that politician isn’t the head of the country now. But hey, we shouldn’t hold South Korea responsible for dumb things their politicians said after apologies were made, especially when they become president. But let’s hold anything that Japanese politicians say after apologies were made against them.

    Dur?

  • johnniewhite

    “Heavy state press censorship in Japan”

    This is a classic example of illusion some of you have — sadly, you cannot see the differences between the communist China and fully democratic Japan. Asians look similar, but you need to see more closely. Come on!

    • TV Monitor

      johnniewhite

      fully democratic Japan.

      Japan is not a democracy at all. In no democracy, single party is in power for 65 years, only totalitarian ones do.

      I am surprised that you thought Japan was a democracy, it never was and never will be.

      • johnniewhite

        TV Monitor,

        I am afraid that what you say is limited by your notion of the concept itself. The fact that Japanese democracy does not take the same shape and form as the other Western countries does not mean that Japan is not a democratic country. After all, its post-war society was built on GHQ’s master plan of long-term occupation with the tint of influence from Comintern. And before the war, Japanese democracy had its own form.

        Don’t forget that there was a period of disastrous rule by DPJ between 2009 and 2012. Their incompetence to govern the country was so clear to see that they will never be trusted again.

      • TV Monitor

        johnniewhite

        The fact that Japanese democracy does not take the same shape and form
        as the other Western countries does not mean that Japan is not a
        democratic country.

        The fundamental core of a democracy is a periodic change of power between powers, which happened in Korea and Taiwan, but not in totalitarian countries like China and Japan.

      • johnniewhite

        TV Monitor.

        Is it not that free election system is the core of democracy? Japanese people do not trust socialists or communists. Socialist (DPJ) took power once, as I said, and nearly ruined Japan. I cannot see how you can group Japanese administration and Chinese communist regime into the same type. Totally wrong.

      • TV Monitor

        johnniewhite

        Is it not that free election system is the core of democracy?

        Japan doesn’t have free election due to an extreme gerrymandering, where a farmer’s vote was worth 5 times as much as a city dweller’s vote in terms of parliamentary representation.

        Combined with a low voter turnout, the LDP was able to rule Japan with only 35% of votes, and why Abe is able to push through his constitutional rewriting agenda with 65% of public in opposition.

        It takes both the free electoral system and a strong citizen’s participation in political debate that makes a democracy, and Japan has neither of those. So Japan is more like China than Korea or Taiwan, both of which have relatively equal representations across districts and a strong citizen’s activism.

        In Asia, there are only two true democracies, Korea and Taiwan. Japan was never a democracy, and is reverting back to a Tojo Hideki style totalitarianism.

      • johnniewhite

        TV Monitor,

        From your description I can read your dis-appreciation of Japanese people and their culture and society. Low voting rate is people’s choice; in communist China, people doesn’t have a vote. In Japan there is freedom of speech. Spies are allowed to work there freely. Even communists can be active. They can shout “Kill Abe!” in public demonstration, but they aren’t arrested, whereas in China, censorship is strong, and anyone who is critical of the communist regime will be arrested as we are reminded by the case in the bookshop in Hong Kong.

      • TV Monitor

        johnniewhite

        Low voting rate is people’s choice

        Of course, it is Japanese people’s choice to not be democratic. Democracy requires individual citizen’s participation in political process and Japanese citizens have abandoned that, due to cultural reasons. Japanese society has whole has not matured enough for democracy yet.

      • johnniewhite

        TV Monitor,

        Japanese people are happy with their lives, and do not have desire for change. Can you see the life from this angle?

        S. Korea is totally different: nearly 80% of them want to come out of S. Korea to live. They are deeply unhappy. That’s the background.

        So your analysis of democracy needs serious rethinking, isn’t it?

      • TV Monitor

        johnniewhite

        Japanese people are happy with their lives, and do not have desire for change.

        So there is no change.

        S. Korea is totally different: nearly 80% of them want to come out of S. Korea to live. They are deeply unhappy.

        So there is a fierce drive for change.

      • Fred Orangefield

        Here is one ROC worshipper or promoter with wishful thinking. Will there be a day to look at things holistically and objectively?

      • TV Monitor

        johnniewhite

        Is it not that free election system is the core of democracy?

        Free and FAIR election. Due to the gerrymandering, no FAIR electoral representation. Seriously, Japanese political system looks feudal, where the elected parliamentary members are from former feudal lord families of the districts they represent and seats are inherited through generation. The only place where this feudal politics doesn’t work is in the cities, whose parliamentary representation is suppressed via gerrymandering.

        I almost cried when one rural Japanese voter was commenting that North Korea had it better than his town since Kim Jong Un was only the third gen while his parliamentary representative was fourth gen.

      • TV Monitor

        johnniewhite

        The fact that Japanese democracy does not take the same shape and form
        as the other Western countries does not mean that Japan is not a
        democratic country.

        The fundamental core of a democracy is a periodic change of power between powers, which happened in Korea and Taiwan, but not in totalitarian countries like China and Japan.

      • createpeace

        Hey, what do you know about Japan? the LDP lost for about 4 years. When the earthquake and tsunami hit Japan, the other party didn’t work at all and it used the disaster for their political performance and people desided not to vote for them anymore.
        Btw, Korea and China don’t have freedom of speech. Because they are not democrats.

    • TV Monitor

      johnniewhite

      fully democratic Japan.

      Japan is not a democracy at all. In no democracy, single party is in power for 65 years, only totalitarian ones do.

      I am surprised that you thought Japan was a democracy, it never was and never will be.

  • shatonbytories

    After trawling through the comments here, we again find that most people don’t even notice they are debating the issue in terms of how it impacts on the way the nation states involved are imagined (with either “Korea” or “Japan” as injured party – speech marks used to highlight the fact that these are simply imagined human constructs most often (ludicrously) believed to be real and immutable by right wing nationalists the world over.)
    Hardly anyone here sees the women themselves beyond their objectified use in the nation state debate ragging above their heads. These are individual living and breathing human beings able to feel pain, shame and be emotionally crippled 70 years after these horrid events.
    Who cares whether “Japan” has or hasn’t apologized to “Korea” – what are “Japan” and “Korea” anyway, who defines them, who represents them, who get to control these definitions, do the women really even care either way?
    If we are honest and really think about the issue, we will see that the debate mostly revolves around the Korean reactionary patriarchy’s embarrassment that the Japanese reactionary patriarchy violated “their” women, and the Japanese reactionary patriarchy denying that it would ever be so base as to do so. Both of these patriarchies (for that is what obviously controls both countries) can go f£&@ themselves as far as I am concerned.
    Instead we need to apologize to the women themselves as individual human beings who think and feel and deserve respect. Anyone who feels unable to do so for nationalist reasons is an embarrassment to the “nation state” HE champions and can in no way be classed as a true patriot.

  • Fred Orangefield

    All you have described are supported by documentary evidence and I believe they are true; but there are lots of people who hate hearing these. I hope your message won’t be deleted by the moderator here.

  • blondein_tokyo

    This is exactly why S. Korea has not been able to let this issue go. When government ministers, speaking in official capacity for the government, make statements denying that the women were sex slaves (they were) it shows that the Japanese government is not actually taking responsibility. I hope that S. Korea recinds the recent agreement in light of this statement.

  • shatonbytories

    Another Comfort Women article, and yet again most people commenting do so from a nationalistic perspective with either “Korea” or “Japan” as injured or offending party – I use speech marks to highlight the fact that both Japan and Korea are simply imagined human constructs which will differ according to time or personal perception and which nobody has the ability, let alone right, to concretely define. Thus, who really cares which “nation state” has been slighted more than the other, it is utterly meaningless.

    This historical reality (and ongoing, present day nightmare for those still alive) is about real people, not Country A v Country B. But hardly anyone on here takes time to consider the women themselves beyond their objectified use in the debate raging above their heads. These are individual, living and breathing human beings able to feel pain, shame and be emotionally crippled 70 years after these horrid events.
    Who cares whether “Japan” has or hasn’t apologized to “Korea” at State level – what are “Japan” and “Korea” anyway? Who gets to define them? Who gets to control these definitions? Do we all have to adhere to this collective, nationalist line? Abe said this, Park did that – Do the women really even care either way. The shame will likley never leave them, they are not asking for personal apology as a way of attacking “Japan” (the Japan that the right wing ludicrously believe is real and immutable.) They just want justice.

    If we are honest and really think hard about the issue, we will notice that the debate mostly revolves around Korean men in power (yeah, yeah, Park’s a woman) and their male shame that Japanese men were able to kidnap and violate “their” women, and Japanese men in power denying that “Japan” would ever be so base as to do so. Well, both patriarchies (for that is what obviously controls both countries) can go f£&@ themselves as far as I am concerned.
    Instead we need to apologize to the women themselves as individual human beings who think and feel and deserve respect. Anyone who feels unable to do so for nationalist reasons (“no evidence of coercion” indeed! Is that the basis of your argument?) is an embarrassment to the “nation state” HE champions and can in no way be classed as a true patriot.

  • Takahiro Katsumi

    I’ve come up with a median but more down-to-earth term. How about, “military sex recruits”?

    Be it that it was brokered by private entity, these enterprises were working at the behest of the Japanese Imeperial Army in an occupied or annexed territory. Of course it was military-controlled operation. Of course they were actively involved. And more significantly, of course they had overwhelming power over the local enterprises.

    It doesn’t matter if the military personnel were or were not directly involved in the acts of recruting–whether it was forced or made-voluntary, the military controlled the operation, provided logistics to bring in massive number of women to their service by a truck load, built and operated the brothels. All this means is that it was a concerted and systematic effort on the Japanese side, only brokered by local entities, to run a forced prostitution enterprise.

    The purpose of the forcibly or persuaded (by false promises,etc) recruited women were not merely to ‘comfort’ the soldies but to provide sexual services. In legal terms, this fits the definition of “enforced prostituion” as war crimes or crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

    So, “military sex recruits.”

    I Don’t think there’s any ambiguity in these three words.

    On the other hand, “sexual slavery” is another legal term used to describe the crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC. As someone has already described, the circumstances that the “sex recruits” were placed under do fit the definition of “enslavement” as described in the Rome Statute (Art. 7.2. (c)) for crimes against humanity), deprived of freedom to move or leave the premises at will.

    “Enslavement” means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children;”

    So in today’s legal definition and its derived terminology it is appropriate to call the act by the Japanese Imperial Army as “forced prostitution” and/or “sexual slavery”. Hence, the subject of such acts may be appropriately called, “sexual slaves.”

    BTW, Japan is party to the Rome Statute of ICC. They joined the treaty in 2007 during the First Abe Administration. So they are, or should be , well aware of the legal and internationally accepted (124 countries — excluding U.S., China, Russia, etc. ) definition in today’s terms.

  • johnniewhite

    The word “sex slave” was first used in this dispute by a left-wing scholar Yoshiaki Yoshimi who decided to go for a SLAP lawsuit against Sakurauchi. Today we heard that Yoshimi has lost the case at Tokyo District Court.

    Is it not the time that JT should acknowledge the fact that there is no legal basis of using that term, and examine all the factual evidence available? Isn’t it what journalism for?

    • johnniewhite

      One might be tempted to say that on this court ruling as evidence, the legal system is under the dictatorship of Abe administration. :)

    • Takahiro Katsumi

      The court ruling was about the actions of the former MP and whether it constituted an act of defamation or slandering. The court ruled against the plaintiff that it’s not. But the court did not pass any judgments on the determination of whether the acts by the Japanese military constituted an act of sexual slavery as defined in international law.

    • blondein_tokyo

      The women said they were forced to have sex against their will, and were kept captive by the military. That is what a sex slave is, so that is all the factual evidence that is needed for the press to use the term.

    • RolandRackham

      You’ve forgotten the first rule of journalism: Never let the truth get in the way of a sensational story!

      Too be fair to JT, “Truth” is subjective and, more importantly, time consuming (ie expensive). For instance, if that had the time & money, I’m sure JT would write a story that breaks down the Comfort Women by nationality (apparently a great many were Japanese). Then break down the groups by 01: How many were forced by the Gov’t, 02: How many were unlawfully “recruited” by private enterprise, 03: How many were sold, IAW the local customs, 04: How many were volunteers. Then they would find out how each of these groups were compensated. US & British records show that many CW appeared financially well off thanks to their trade.

      But such info is unlikely to ever see the light of day. That would require serious journalism & serious journalism is just to expensive. Sound bites from extremists are for more…affordable.

  • Ethan Kaiunmanzoku

    Why trusting the testimony by those old women that are proven to be inconsistent and untrustworthy?
    Why ignoring the fact that fraud and perjury that are so common in that country?
    Why ignoring the fact that there is no record / evidence of the men — very strong and powerful — defended those girls if they were kidnapped by force?
    Why ignoring the fact that there is a official US-Army report describing what they were during the WW2?
    Why siding with the views of Asahi Shimbun who retracted their reports 17 months ago? Wasn’t it the case that the Yoshida Testimony was all made up?

    It seems that this is the end of The Japan Times.

  • Kayo Kanako Kimura

    People seem to be mixing up the word comfort woman as a euphemism for ‘sex slave’, which is totally wrong. Comfort woman was a euphemism for prostitute at the time. The Japanese army created a system to satisfy their soldiers’ sexual needs by having them use brothels exclusive for soldiers only, in order to avoid V.D. spreading. Upon gathering women through ads, they decided to call them comfort women, so that the women would not be seen as nor feel they were mere prostitutes themselves. In Japanese, comfort women is written as 慰安婦 (Ian-fu). The ‘慰安 Ian’ part means comfort, while the ‘婦 fu’ means not ‘woman’ but ‘lady’. The symbol ‘婦 fu’ is used in various Japanese words which expresses admiration towards women such as ‘婦人 fujin=lady in high position’ or ‘婦女子 fujoshi=ladies including young girls’. In direct translation, comfort woman would be 慰安女(Ian-onna/jo=woman/female) in which there is no sense of respect of any kind but simply noting the female sex. The very fact that they used ‘婦 fu’ instead of ‘女 onna/fu’ shows they wished to give women working in comfort stations to feel pride in serving Japanese soldiers who were risking their lives for the sake of their country; that they were fighting this war together with them. Although this kind of approach may sound deceiving based on morals we have today, back then there were women who have said they began to feel they’re doing something meaningful for the first time in their lives, after they switched to working as comfort women from being a prostitute in ordinary brothels. There were many soldiers who gave a salute to comfort women before and after they were served, and order was always preserved with drunk soldiers not allowed entrance, plus the women were able to have their health checked. Comfort stations were not the ordinary brothels we’d imagine in which customers had all the power as long as they paid. In fact, in most of the Japanese brothel culture starting from the Edo period, it was usually the prostitute who had power over what the customer can and cannot do. Most of it also had euphemisms instead of calling the women bluntly prostitutes such as ‘花魁 Oiran’, ‘太夫 Tayu’ and others. So the Japanese army choosing to use the phrase comfort women is nothing peculiar to Japanese or others who are familiar with Japanese culture and history. It was not made to hide some dark scheme, such as enslaving women for sexual needs. It was made to make everyone, including soldiers to respect them. Otoh, the phrase ‘sex slave’ was invented by a Japanese lawyer supporting Korean ex-comfort women around the 90s. As so, logically, comfort women can never be a euphemism for ‘sex slave’ which was a word created decades after the system existed. It should also be noted that there are ex-comfort women who do not like being called a (former) ‘sex slave’. Even if they worked in comfort stations against their wills, calling them ‘sex slaves’ arouses too much perverted speculation which they do not want. In addition, there were many many other comfort women who willingly worked in the stations who would never consider they were ever a ‘sex slave’.

  • Tachomanx

    You hardly made a point there, though you made me laugh at how petty you are.

    When you post a general knowledge thing, then yeah, anyone can do it.

    But when you try to post something that supports your (very wrong) ideals you fail miserably. And on that aspect was my comment making a point.

    • TV Monitor

      Tachomanx

      You hardly made a point there

      Well, Korea is the most innovative country in the world and Japan is not, that’s the point.

      • Tachomanx

        Japan is fourth and basically tied with the second and third place. Nevermind again that Japan’s economy still remains several times bigger, files more patents and even seems to be more productive.

        In any case, you simply prove how petty a small man you are.

        How about trying to prove your more scandalous claims? You can’t and that was the whole point of this silly argument.

  • Jerome Besson

    Seventy years after the facts, what is the fuss all about ?

    We know how daughters are still deemed a burden in many less affluent Asian societies. Prostitution rings recruited underage women. Destitute fathers made a bundle putting their daughters as collateral for a loan.

    And Japanese authorities tried to clamp down on the human trade activities of their subjects from Korea. There are traces of both illicit activities and policing measures in the locally published newspapers of the period.

    All compensation issues involving Japan’s 1910-1945 colonial rule were “settled completely and finally” in a bilateral pact attached to the 1965 Japan-South Korea basic treaty.

    Are there no more pressing issues than recycling the lurid reports of porn and crime in the red lights district (赤線) that made the heyday of the infamous “Kasutori magazines” (カストリ雑誌) of the occupation era?

    In Japan, where even constitutions are replaced, journalism perennially remains a disgrace.

  • createpeace

    More than 90%of policemen and politicians were Koreans in Korea in the era. They had human rights and the right to vote, too. What did they do when their girls were forced by Japanese?
    What is more, one of the comfort women said she bought diamonds in her book. She also said she wanted to buy her mother a house and worked as a prostitute. There are documents of the women’s bank accounts. However the “non fiction” book of the testimonies keeps changing as it is published new edition. Once it was added the part which tells Japanese forced the women, omitting the part which said the women saw an advertisement and applied it. So your edition might not be the same as the original one.

  • createpeace

    “That’s because of a heavy state press censorship in Japan.”

    Japanese didn’t know that Korea teaches hate for decades. Japanese media didn’t report the real Korea. Yes, that’s true.

    And you don’t know that an old Korean man who said he was happy when Korea was Japan was killed by younger Koreans. in China, for Tibetan people or Chinese in Tibet, it takes 2 weeks to send email!

  • AltVoice

    Totsuka Etsuro, a radical lawyer in Japan started pitching the term ‘sex slave’ to the UNCHR in addressing this issue quite a few years ago. U.S. military reports state that the women were paid for their services, but just like how this kind of business is run even today, the brothel owners had a tendency to take advantage of the women. Most comfort stations were run by proprietors who spoke the same language as the women; some had recruited them themselves, so the business
    relationship was between them and the women. If the relationship was ‘sexual slavery,’ it involved the proprietors as the women’s ‘masters.’

  • mayu mama

    Team Red surreptitiously invaded the United States. “An appeal to pity” attempts to persuade using emotion-specifically, sympathy-rather than evidence. Fake victims have recently adopted a strategy that capitalises on the strength of appeals to pity.

    > It is the policy of The Japan Times that “sex slaves” is acceptable for referring to the women who were forced to provide sex for Japanese troops before and during World War II.

    What did you imagine when you heard word “sex slave”?
    Media representations affect our views of particular social groups or issues.
    In fact, there were Japanese comfort women more than Korean comfort women.
    The public education of Korea ignores the good will of Japan. “Appeal to Pity” has become the business for Korea.

  • createpeace

    The population of Japanese were only 1.5 to 4% in the Korean Peninsula at that time. 70 to 90% of policemen and politicians were Koreans. Koreans had the human rights and be able to vote as Japanese citizens. They went to school and learned reading and writing both Korean and Japanese as they didn’t know how to read or write at all. There are lots photos of the comfort women smiling and dressed nicely. There are documents of their bank accounts and advertisements for prostituton on newspapers. Some of the comfort women said they bought diamonds and houses for parents. There are also articles of Korean newspapers written in the wartime which say that kidnnapers were Koreans and Japanese policemen helped the Korean girls many times. Who deny the facts and tell a lie? Now Korea teachs hate in school for decades. It started harder from 1990s. Is there anybody who can tell that this is not the world’s biggest propaganda in the 21st century?

  • annupri

    Is it the policy of The Japan Times that “comfort women” or even “Prostitute” are acceptable for referring to the women who were forced to provide sex for Korean/US/UN troops during and after Korean War?

    or is it the policy of The Japan Times not to cover this same issue?

    “Ex-South Korean ‘comfort women’ for U.S. troops sue own government”

    JUL12, 2014

  • annupri

    Is it the policy of The Japan Times that “comfort women” or even “Prostitute” are acceptable for referring to the women who were forced to provide sex for Korean/US/UN troops during and after Korean War?

    or is it the policy of The Japan Times not to cover this same issue?

    “Ex-South Korean ‘comfort women’ for U.S. troops sue own government”

    JUL12, 2014

  • blondein_tokyo

    “Unfortunately the kidnappers were Koreans actually.”

    And held captive by and raped by Japanese.

  • blondein_tokyo

    “Have you ever seen that?” Who are you, Ken Ham? Making the claim that one cannot possibly know the truth unless one was there to see it is doing exactly what you later accused me of – ignoring the evidence.
    Here are the facts.
    Korean women, and women of other nationalities, were kidnapped, lied to, or sold by their families into sexual slavery for the Japanese Imperial Army. These women were held captive and raped over the entire course of the war. These women have come forward with their stories, which were all very similar, and were collaborated by documentation. The Japanese government has even confirmed that this happened, fully admit to the accusations, and have apologized as well as offered what some people would call compensation.
    Further facts. Rape exists. It happens A LOT in war. Japanese are as fully capable of rape as any other nationality.
    This is not in dispute. At all.