Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
The 16 victims filed the suit in 2016, seeking 200 million won ($155,000) each in compensation.
Wait, so this long simmering international dispute can be settled for just $2.48 million? Sheesh, just pay it.
That would mean admitting Koreans are people too.
The thing is, this doesn't end by paying that amount. If you have a historical dispute of this complexity, no amount of payment is enough to stop the court cases and national sentiment.
I don’t think it’s the money, it’s the apology. It’s a real “sex slaves learned skills, some of which were to their benefit” Florida education system vibe.
I think the more commonly used vocabulary refers to these woman as "sex slaves".
This kind of pedantry doesn't add to the conversation, it takes away from it. "South Korea orders Japan to compensate sex slaves" is a genuinely worse article title than the given one, and contains far less information than referring to them as "comfort women."
Yes, these people were sex slaves. The reason the term "comfort women" is helpful is because these are very specific sex slaves from a specific time, a specific place, and under specific circumstances. South Korea doesn't want Japan to compensate sex slaves, South Korea wants Japan to compensate these sex slaves.
AFAIU Japan uses this term for a different reason. The government (at least domestically) does not recognize these people as slaves. When they reported on their investigation on whether the sex labor was forced, they purposefully used a language that can be taken both ways. I don't know if Abe's cabinet changed the stance, but the word comfort women is still in use because Tokyo can refer to them without classifying them slaves.
If you have a source for that alternative fact you argue, you are welcome to share it here.
Here in Japan, the term comfort women is used for the exact same reason it is used in English and around the world: it clearly and unequivocally describes the people being it is used to describe.
It's not a weasel word used to avoid talking about the truth. It's just the word that people use to talk about a specific group of victims. It's a useful term that quickly gets us to the core issue, rather than starting at an extremely vague term and requiring clarifying language every time we talk about it. It's just basic communication.
Is this case being talked about in Japan? Has japanese news media reported on it at all?
Yes.
So what have you been hearing? Are people supportive? In denial? Angry?
Caveat: I said yes because in the past they have reported, and I don't see a reason not to. If I check the internet, though, I don't see an article. Yet.
Now. The atmosphere here is somewhat complicated. The Japanese internet space is a solid ultraconservative shit hole. They are openly racists who spew hate speech. Even Yahoo Comments, the biggest news website here with user comments, have absolutely no moderation.
Accordingly, 99.9% of the net space is full of denialism. They also point at the JPN-SK agreement Abe made, which declared that SK will not demand money from Japan for the comfort women problem.
In reality, the agreement apparently had flaws in wording etc., and we also need to take into account that SK Supreme Court is sometimes criticized by news media for being influenced by national sentiments. Don't get me wrong – I don't say that's necessarily a bad thing given that the Japanese tactics on this issue has been insincere.
Outside the internet space, it's even more complex. Ultraconservatives say media are pro-South Korea. But they'll say that unless they get their racist way, so it's not credible. It's so sensitive it's hard to find a balanced analysis on this one. My feeling is that they are rather neutral. They just report and silently move on without taking sides, in my eyes.
The LDP... they are a mess. A mixture of right-leaning centrists and, again, ultraconservatives.
If I look at the general public, I don't see any group or person siding with south korea. It's kind of understandable. Most people here distance themselves from politics. Ask them what they think, and they'll just say "it's too difficult to me", and they're just being honest. They don't think comfort women were sex slaves. They also don't think they were voluntarily cooperating. These people just don't have an opinion. They never read up on anything political. Just watch TV, work and sleep.
Thanks for providing an insightful comment. Seems like politics follows a pattern everywhere. Sounds like it must be very difficult to go against the political grain in Japan
I wish Japanese people would realize that "not having an opinion" is the same as being rather strongly in favor of whoever is currently in power.
Yes. Couldn't have said that better myself.
Woman selling or giving themselves for comfort or sex isn't an issue.
Being enslaved to do so is.
Even better that they use the specific term, it brings awareness. I bet you the thread op learned something from your comment specifically because the title used this language.
How about both: "'comfort women' sex slaves"?
Sure, as long as you're not concerned about using 4 words where 2 will do.
What's stopping japan from just saying no to the courts request ?
Courts don't have any jurisdiction on another country unless they are in some sort of legal agreement between two countries
S Korea could freeze Japanese assets. S Korea and Japan are both members of the international criminal court so maybe that could be a factor. I'm honestly just guessing though. It could end up being a symbolic victory for these women though.
Actually, businessmen of South Korea and Japan do have good relations. There's thus enough lobbying in Japan to make a deal with South Korea.
That's also my question, but in my case it's technically why the court can make this decision. I mean, I believe they're right but, as you say, it's outside the courts, jurisdiction as far as I thought how they work.
I believe Japan has said no in the past, yet it makes sense for them to pay money in order to maintain the relationship with South Korea.
It was systematic rape, not "work"