Entry details

Curzon
Author

Curzon

Date

April 4th, 2005

Tags

,

Comments

9 Comments so far.
Add yours.

Women-Only Cars Introduced in Tokyo

Would women-only train cars survive an American lawsuit? asks Joe over at NichiNichi. I think it’s borderline discrimination, as noted in this post. Joe seems to agree, but notes that some Japanese men support it despite the crowding:

‘It’s a good change because I no longer have to carry a bag and hang onto a strap to avoid being mistaken for a molester,’ Hitoshi Ishida, 53, a company employee from the Saitama Prefecture city of Kawaguchi, said. ‘But if other carriages are more crowded as a result, the railway operator should set some other coaches aside for elderly people.

Continues Joe:

Now, I’m far from a brilliant legal scholar, but this seems as if it would be sketchy under U.S. constitutional law. When the government is endorsing gender discrimination, it needs some sort of exceedingly persuasive justification to do so. And a regime like this seems to be discriminatory. The ladies can sit in a relatively uncrowded car on the train, while the gentlemen are forced to stand in the cattle cars. (Admittedly, JR is private, but it’s subsidized; and Tokyo Metro, which is run by the government, wants to introduce a similar scheme next month.)

Both Joe and I will be commuting during rush hour in Tokyo in just a few short weeks, so we’ll keep you posted on what it’s really like.

Comments to this entry

Joe
April 4, 2005
5:58 pm
Thanks for the link. I'm hoping that someone more knowledgeable than myself will weigh in on this.
Saru
April 4, 2005
7:53 pm
Legal arguments are way out of my league, but how does U.S. law apply to issues like seperate restroom facilities for men and women?
Mutantfrog
April 4, 2005
9:31 pm
Joe said "Now, I'm far from a brilliant legal scholar, but this seems as if it would be sketchy under U.S. constitutional law"
Remember that that US constitution actually does NOT have an equal rights clause. There was an proposed, primarily to create a constitutional basis for sexual equality, but the movement to pass it floundered around 1980, and it fell short of ratification by three states.

On the other hand, article 14 of the Japanese constitution states:_"All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin."_

On a strictly legal basis, there may actually be a stronger case for outlawing it in Japan, although of course we know that in reality the judiciary over there tends to be a little hostile to social reform lawsuits, and individuals are very reluctant to file suits that will almost certainly fail.
Joe
April 4, 2005
9:34 pm
Well, there are some kinds of gender discrimination that are tolerable under U.S. law. The example we got in our textbook was related to citizenship: a child born out of wedlock in a foreign country is automatically a U.S. citizen if the mother is a citizen, but if the father is a citizen, extra proof of a parental relationship is needed before the government will recognize the child's citizenship. This puts females at a definite advantage when it comes to getting citizenship for their children born out of wedlock overseas, but it's legal because it addresses a substantial government interest. (Officially, that interest is making sure that kids have a significant relationship with their American parents before they are recognized as citizens; you can assume that a kid is going to be with its mother when it is born, but you can't make that assumption about the father. Unofficially, the INS doesn't want tons of half-Asian kids sired by Marines to get citizenship without proof that the Marine knows of the kid's existence.)

Segregated restrooms could be subject to a similar argument, since restrooms are generally recognized as a private zone of sorts. Forcing women to do their business in the presence of men (which requires at least partial disrobing) is significantly more dangerous than forcing women to stand in a crowded train car with men.

But I think what really sets restrooms apart from train cars is the fact that women get a choice of train car, whereas men don't. Changing your scenario a bit (as they love to do in law school classes), what if women could use the men's room, but men couldn't use the women's room? And what if, hypothetically, the men's room was dirty, but the women's room was clean? (Very hypothetically.)
Adamu
April 4, 2005
9:42 pm
I'm even less of a legal scholar than Joe, but I think it's clear to see that the train companies are not losing any sleep over the possibility of getting sued for this.

In this case at least, the lack of excessive legal restrictions gives the train companies the needed leeway to tackle the problem of chikan (molestation) heads-on. Fact is, the danger of chikan (not just on trains) is very real and remains an immediate and daily problem for perhaps a majority of women. Taking women out of harm's way *right now* is a good idea.

Collectively, though, Japan's response to the chikan problem has been pathetically slow to the point where one wonders: do those in charge even recognize it as a problem? What's conspicuously lacking from the female-only train car movement is a concerted effort to end the phenomenon known as chikan. Why has Japan been so slow to move on this?

Japanese girls trade chikan stories with their friends as a topic at sleepovers. From my own discussions with them, the ones who will talk about it treat it as a somewhat scary but otherwise harmless expression of irrepressible male urges. This is a position shared by a large segment of Japanese society.

For one thing, sexuality in Japan is a lot different than it is in the West. An outside observer would soon notice that rape, man-on-girl pedophilia and chikan have received a shockingly positive, even
whimsical, portrayal in the mass media. Just a few examples from the mainstream (Google for links) include: Nyan Nyan Club (Girl groups with "funny" songs about teachers raping them), Morning Musume (Massively popular girl group that is absent of overt lyrics about rape and chikan but does openly pander to the dirty old man market in its merchandising), the booming aidoru industry with models as young as 13 appearing in what amounts to softcore pornography "photo collections",
and the recent popularity of "moe-kei" (a softcore version of hentai anime designs a la those available at jlist.com).

Outside the mainstream (ie: what can be discussed on TV) Japan has what is probably the second-largest (if not the largest) pornography industry in the world, which domestically fosters a culture of fetishizing just about everything (but chikan fantasy is probably one of the biggest-selling genres). Police look the other way at the prostitution industry.

Men and women are significantly separated at school despite coed classrooms, and Japanese men tend to get their ideas about men and women from the same popular media that tacitly and explicitly condone and even celebrate chikan.

I don't have the energy to research this for the purposes of a blog comment, but as far as I can see the current system for combating chikan on trains consists of a) putting up signs that say "chikan is a crime! Stop it!" around stations b) "Chikan Alert!" signs around neighborhoods, and c) female-only cars, which have been around in Kansai for 2 years already.

Socially, it is taboo to talk about chikan, and there is an unspoken rule stating that people riding trains together must pretend that they don't exist. It's part of a general unspoken rule that you are not to venture out of your established social circle. This creates situations that we have all read about: girls getting molested while the rest of the passengers simply look the other way, even ignoring cries for help. The responsibility for catching these perverts usually falls on the victim, who is often either too ashamed or feels like it would be a burden to other people to make a fuss about it. It's as if victims of chikan aren't victims at all -- boys will be boys, right?

The easy explanation for why Japan has such a hands-off attitude toward chikan (pun intended) is tradition: women have been seen as objects of men's pleasure throughout its history, stemming from Confucian philosophy. Another explanation could be simply that these men are too fearful or misogynist to have a normal relationship. And the encouragement they get from multiple sectors of society makes it that much easier to translate fantasy into action. Whatever the reason, the average Japanese person who has not been involved with chikan, to the extent that he or she thinks about it, probably does not view it with much concern, and ideas of "boys will be boys" resonate with the unspoken "common sense conservatism" that is common in Japan.

Treating train cars like men's and women's bathrooms, which is an apt comparison, would be unacceptable in the long term. Maybe right now the situation is similar -- the packed trains place men and women's private parts precariously close to each other. As someone who may end up having a personal stake in this problem -- if I have a daughter I might be raising her in Japan -- I can only plead that people wake up and realize that chikan is not a victimless crime.
Adamu
April 4, 2005
9:44 pm
Oops, broke my own rule again (do not write comments that are longer than the original post) but I still have one more thing to add:

Japanese men just need to keep their hands to themselves! Didn't anyone teach them that??
Joe
April 4, 2005
9:44 pm
Mutantfrog: The "14th Amendment":http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Amend.html is construed to extend to gender, as well as a bunch of other forms of discrimination. The Equal Rights Amendment wasn't recognizing something totally new. It was more of an attempt to make the prohibition against gender discrimination more explicit.

Right now, the courts in the U.S. will allow some types of discrimination on the basis of gender, like the example above, that would not be permissible on the basis of race, ethnicity, or other factors (so-called "suspect classes"). But there is definitely a constitutional ban on many more arbitrary types of gender discrimination, thanks to the 14th Amendment. See, e.g., the Supreme Court forcing the Virginia Military Institute to admit women.

Japan, of course, is exactly the opposite. It has an equal rights clause, about which the courts don't seem to give a shit. See, e.g., the Otaru case.
Curzon
April 4, 2005
10:14 pm
Ahhh... strict scrutiny, commerce clause... I must say, I don't miss constitutional law.

Adamu, long comment always welcome.

MORE NEWS: http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20050405wo22.htm
Mutant Frog Travelogue » Blog Archive » Photographic proof of Japanese used panty vending machines? Plus a rant at no extra charge
April 14, 2005
7:36 am
[...] ishes. Of course, people can’t help their sexual appetites, but as I’ve ranted elsewhere, this fetish culture has its more vi [...]