The Japanese rightist

Sunday, November 27, 2005

Women-only train coach

More and more train companies have introduced women-only coaches for preventing perverts from indulging themselves.

The number of sexual criminals on trains never decreases, and this problem has annoyed train companies.

National Railroad, the former public company introduced this system once, but they abolished it by 1973 because "the service should be equally provided since men and women pay equally. They must have the same right to choose any coach." by the head of Tobu railroad company.

Throughout the discussion for over 30 years, they decided to restart this system, and we can see those coaches in the last coach in the train.
Obviously, it means that men have to be patient with crowded coaches without the right to choose. Plus there are still objections about this system mostly from men. However, as far as I am concerned, no women are feeling uncomfortable about it.

The change of the train system is widely reported in TVs. "It's very safe without men" says the interviewee who is using the train. But I think she doesn't have to worry in the first place.


At 12/12/2005 04:38:00 AM , Blogger Darin said...

". But I think she doesn't have to worry in the first place."
Very funny, but sadly, not true :( I don't understand the urge to just grab a woman, any woman, but I've seen it happen, I have friends who are great friends, but I can't picture anyone grabbing them, who have been grabbed.
I've even been grabbed myself!! (Mind you she was a cute girl and I didn't mind; but I'd rather she just said hello instead (yes I'm a guy))
There is something seriously wrong with that part of the culture... or is there?
Before western "contamination", Japan was very open about sexuality. It was considered a haven for the gay Dutch men that did trading (not to say all Dutch men are gay, but the ones that were often came to Japan -- yes I'm Dutch, and no I'm not ); it was even common practice to "test out" your future wife before you got married during the Heian time period.
But that was then, and this is now, and just grabbing girls at random is not cool.

At 1/22/2006 07:27:00 PM , Anonymous  said...


At 6/27/2006 11:57:00 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obviously Japan is choosing the cheaper but wrong and discriminative solution to deal with the groping problem, instead of the more expensive but fair solution. Increasing the number of the trains, induction of the flexible time to the companies, or educating people should be taken.
They are discriminating people on the basis of their chromosome (XX/XY). It’s basically same as like that discriminating some people with genetic disease such as Down’s syndrome. Is this truly a modern democratic country?

At 9/16/2008 04:27:00 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

re: Anonymous' comment...

Education is a phrase tossed around as though it has actually been enacted to effect. To date, with regard to harassment of women in Japan, it has not, so I see no need to hold out for a miracle.

Contrary to your assertions, it is a most democratic move. In the comprehensive survey that went out, most women did indeed feel that a women-only train would be both beneficial and relieving. It is not discrimination based on is discrimination based on a democratically expressed desire of half the damn population. Majority rule, buddy. If the majority of your blasted Y-chromosome-carrying people would keep their hands and erections off my XX-chromosome carrying people, we wouldn't have this problem now, would we?

Try having your space violated sometime. See how great that feels. See if you wouldn't appreciate the chance to escape that. The guys who must suffer more crowded trains? The innocent ones? Collateral damage. Maybe they should take their pervy peers aside and teach them a thing or two about decency.

At 10/16/2008 11:36:00 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is not a matter of democracy. The women-only train car violates constitutional rights. The constitution enshrines basic human rights including the equality between humans, in particular discrimination according to inherent characteristics are forbidden. Inherent characteristics are gender, race, ethnic origin...

The constitution protects these basic rights of an individual from beeing overturned by a democratic majority. Even if 99% of the population are in favour of the women-only train, the 1% against have the right to enter the women-only compartment without punishment even if they are men.

At a different note, I dont believe that the majority of XY chromosome carriers are criminals. It is a tiny minority, the collateral damage as you describe affect mostly the innocent.

I am concerned in particular about boys, what they think about. If not accompanied by a female they are not allowed to enter the women-only compartment. In addition, the authorities may consider the problem as solved and will reduce safety measures in the general train compartments. It may get actually more dangerous for everybody on a long term. Safety affects everybody, not only women. Everybody must have the same access to safety. Introducing double standards is dangerous.

If women-only cars are really necessary, a men-only train car is required to remove at least the inequality. The prize of the ticket is the same, the access to public service must be the same.

At 1/02/2009 09:33:00 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Woman only Cars are needed now, i think. But it's Now.
I also think it's not a matter of democracy. But if you(wrote 16.0ct.2008) mensioned to "constitutional rights", I worry about "too much". I also think the matter violates constitutional rights, but now pepole need others.
The writer(16.Oct.2008) mansioned to Boys, and are requred Men Only Cars, if the Women's are needed.
But the most importance is how protect weak people from somebody and something, and how defend against stupid people.
There are some opinion, but one of them is to make "Elder People only Cars". Of course there are priority Seat for Elder and so on, but "not young people" sit there often. And the part of Elder people have some desease, but healty people cannot understand it.
So, people think making Elder only.
But, if the Elder only cars were made, what is next? Which group has priority? How many Cars requred to Railway company?
Where is the Boder between Elder and Young? 65y.o? so Where is the Boder healty and not healty? Child or not child, women or men? How about handicaped people who become panic in the train?

As I wrote at first, NOW Women's cars are needed. Women are dameged very much.
But Railway company must not leave the presant situation. It must announce more about it to resolve.
The Comsumer must change, too. The writer( 22.Jan.2006, wrote in Japanese ) mensioned Comsumer's position. It sads, Men must say opinions about that. I think women must do that, too. Comsumer can make new atmosphere to defend this matter.
And School education is needed. From Elementaly, children should learn what is bad.
There idea need long time, but must do that, i think.

And one more.
I believe, people must be kind for other people.
It is very easy action, and seems very easy idea, but it's important.
Surely the matter violates constitutional rights, but before that, it is the important matter of social comonsence.
If an elder person were standing, younger people must give the seat. If a woman seems having a problem, others give a seat or say something. Adults must protect children in rush hour.

It is very sorry, but now people need womens only cars, but it is not good situation.
Making Women only cars is not solution.

At 1/14/2009 07:53:00 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you for commenting my previous post.
I am the anonymous poster from 16.10.2008.

There are several important issues in your response. Violating constitutional rights should not be taken lightly. With a high probability it will lead to fatal consequences if such violations continue, just because we get used to eroding the constitution or we assume them to be necessary.

Women-only train cars do not exist in any civilized
western country. It is a shame for japan. Independent if they would deemed to be necessary or not, the constitutional laws in north america or western europe would forbid such train cars without the simultaneous introduction of men-only cars.
The main point would be, are women really the only victims of what exactly? If you think on sexual harrasment, although dont know any statistics in japan, but in the subway of New York 30 percent of victims of sexual assaults are male. 30 percent is a minority, however, not a small minority.
Most users of women-only cars in japan cite general safety as reason for using the car. As I explained in my first post, safety concerns everybody. Well, 20% of women cite a better smell as reason for using the car....

You made a good point about education. I have lived long time in a western city with a subway system. Although it was certainly not as crowded as tokyo, but sometimes it was crowded. I have never heard anything about sexual harrasments during that time. If japanese mothers are not able to teach their boys to distinguish good from evil, maybe japanese women deserve what they get.

Coming back to the constitution. Discrimination according to age is not always forbidden. Special protection and priviledges for old people, children or handicapped people are possible, because age is part of everybodies life cycle. It is not the same as gender, or human race, inherent and difficult to change. Even affirmative action would not apply, because it acts case by case and does not automatically priviledge 50 percent of the population above the other 50 percent. The women-only train car is definitive a violation of constitutional rights, in contrast cars for children or handicapped people could be conform with the constitution.

Why is it so dangerous? You gave the answer, but a bit in a different direction. It is dangerous first of all, because you dont know where to draw the line, until what line you accept violation but not further. I have read an article that immediatelly after the broad introduction of women-only trains in japan, suddenly women-only cinemas, pachinko slots, and even restaurants start to appear. The private industry reacted, found a niche, obviously completely legal in japan. Once upon a time in texas was written "Whites Only", "We dont serve niggers here". Are the collective of men the niggers of the 21 century?
Somebody may argue men and women are different, but thats not the point here. Men and women must be equal in front of the law, thats the only point here. Recently, more and more genetic and functional differences are found between human races, even at the cognitive level. Of course, all that is in average, as most differences between men and women are in average only. We would approach a dangerous zone in considering people as different because they belong to a certain category and modifying the law accordingly.

The second dangerous issue in violating constitutional laws is caused by an adaption mechanism as I indicated in my first post. Unconsciously you are the opinion that women need more safety than men. Turning that around means, men need less safety than women. So lets say, how much less safety do men need? Safety measures cost money, governments, private owners want to safe money. So, we can safe on the cost of men.
In that moment a double standard is applied, safety looses to be an absolute matter, rather it becomes relative. Actually, we dont need to increase safety for women, instead we just reduce safety for men, then women are relative more safe and in addition we safe money. That happened in history several times. Do you want to repeat history?
When at the end of the 19th century the british law obliged passenger ships to carry only a live boat capacity for 50 percent of the passengers, it was just an adaption to a british rule adopted some decades earlier, allowing women and children to enter live boats first. Ship companies could safe money, because life boats are more expensive than swim suits. Men are better swimmers, we safe the women first, than we come back and pick up the swimming men. Sharks are actually rare, especially in the north atlantic, the water is too cold for sharks there. It was a brilliant idea, just thinking on everything and saving money.

You are right, the women-only train car should only stay a transient solution not become permanent. I am afraid it became already too easy for train companies in japan to stick the pink stickers. We dont need to change anything else any more. Japans underlying problem of the crowded trains is this enormous centralization of the country around tokyo and yokohama, rarely seen in another country. Recently, decentralisation became a topic, but maybe already forgotten. There is no trouble with squeezed people in trains, because pink stickers are allowed and so convenient. Politicians and railway operators do not need to think about problems in transportation, it became so easy with the pink stickers.
However, somebody in near future will pay a prize for that, if women-only trains are permitted over longer time. If you unearth something from the past and bring it into present time, repetition of that piece of history will have more fatal consequences than it had in the past.

At 8/01/2019 06:07:00 PM , Blogger nergis said...



Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home