Women’s group launches bid to deny sex to men who are pro-war


Staff Writer

A women’s group has started a campaign vowing to swear off sex with any man who is pro-war, to protest Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s push to reinterpret the pacifist Constitution.

The campaign was launched a week ago, on Constitution Day, on a website that encourages women to pledge “not to have sex with men who love war.”

The group, Senso Rabu na Otoko towa Ecchi Shinai Onna no Kai, which roughly means Group of Women Who Don’t Have Sex With Men Who Love War, says it’s against any attempts to clear the path for Japan to engage in war-related activities.

“We are thoroughly opposed to, and determined to go on a strike against any (male) politicians, employers and businessmen who promote the idea of Japan exporting weapons overseas,” it says on the site, referring to a decision by the Cabinet on April 1 to ease the long-standing ban on weapons exports.

The founder, when contacted by The Japan Times, said she is practically the only member of the group. The intention was to “spark public interest in the current government’s pro-war policies,” she said, asking to remain anonymous.

The website has a downloadable “membership card” that outlines its rules. For instance, they should confirm the men they plan to have sex with are “not supportive of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s push to enable Japan to exercise the right to collective self-defense,” and not “engaged in any business that peddles Japan’s war weapons overseas.”

  • 66Jacob

    Very silly. But good click bait for the internet.

  • “The founder, when contacted by The Japan Times, said she is practically the only member of the group.”

    A) Then why is this news?

    B) Why does she then get to speak in the plural as “We…” when it is only her?

    C) Since it is “I” and not “We” (among other reasons) why is her name not included in the article?

    D) How are we to form an objective sexual-economic evaluation of this movement without a photo of her? How can we know if we are missing out on anything without knowing how sexually talented and attractive she is? Are men to quake in their boots in regret of their stance? Or is her protest the equivalent of poor people boycotting Rolls Royce?

    E) And if a man did quake in his boots, and sex were the sole reason a “pro-war” man were to change his views and abstain from “war-making”, just how successful could we really assume that man was going to be in actually advancing his “warlike” agenda, given the demonstrable fragility with which he held to his belief?

    F) What is she saying about her own confidence in herself and her own faculties if what she offers against “war” is not an argument or debate or consideration of history and the facts, but rather an empty threat? How is anyone to respect her and her inert “movement” when she is telling us that women’s power is in their vaginas, and not in their minds?

    G) When feminists begin to praise this movement, how many of them will evade point F?

    • Tom

      You had me until D), then you got creepy and offensive.
      While I think this movement is pretty fundamentally misguided (in seeing women’s only resource as accessibility to sex), the solution isn’t to take part in the normalised evaluation of women by their physical appearance, even if she is suggesting we do so ourselves. Just because you may be doing so ironically, and in reaction to her own self-objectification, does not make it any less real.

      Lastly, as for point G), “If feminists were to begin to praise this movement”; they won’t, please don’t try to speak for a movement you clearly know nothing about.

  • Hanten

    Women all over the world have been vowing to say no to the warmongers for thousands of years. There’s a play about ancient Greek women doing just that called Lysistrata.
    I do hope that women feel that they have more power than that.

    • Right. Just like all those British white feather campaigns. Where you see peace, I see a history of shaming men into combat: feminine violence by proxy, under a veneer of non-agency.

      • Hanten

        Getironic, I didn’t say anything about peace and you have little idea of what I see.
        The negativity you feel towards women and the world in general have nothing to do with me.

      • Now who is making assumptions.