The Japan Times reports that there is to be a new museum, opening next month, which will focus on wartime sexual slavery. The museum is called “The Women’s Active Museum on War and Peace” (Anyone have links to Japanese news reports on this?) and will display materials and videos related to the issue in time for the 60th anniversary of the end of the war.
This comes on the heels of the latest embarrassing contribution to the controversy by 中山成彬 (Nakayama, Nariaki). He is the current Minister of Education and famous for a number of disturbing statements and his support for the removal of discussion of the issue in Japanese textbooks. In his most recent speech on the issue to make news, he spent some nine minutes reading out an email he received from a female Japanese graduate student studying in Canada. It seems that he wanted to emphasize that she agrees that the word now commonly used for comfort women, or 従軍慰安婦 didn’t exist at the time. Even the minister is not stupid enough to deny that there were comfort women at all, but to claim that this term didn’t exist is perhaps somehow supposed to support his crusade against teaching about sexual slavery during the war. You can find articles on this in the Japanese media online: Asahi, Yomiuri, Sankei.
Notice the different emphases in each article reporting on this. Asahi includes, and is the only one of the three newspapers to include this somewhat disturbing quote from the email:
「彼女らには大いに同情すべきだが、（意に反して売春させられたのは）古い時代の日本の農村で見られた情景とそう変わらない」「戦地にある不安定な男の心をなだめ、一定の休息と秩序をもたらした存在と考えれば、プライドを持って取り組むことが出来る職業だったという言い方も出来る」とも述べているという。
The student apparently wants the comfort women, and thus presumably also the sexual slaves (意に反して売春させられた) among them, to take pride in their work providing “comfort” for the unsettled hearts of the soldiers on the battlefield. Yomiuri notes her denial that the term now common existed at the time and adds this quote:
「（従軍慰安婦という言葉は）一部の日本人が自虐的にも戦後に作った。わざわざイメージの悪い言葉を作って、ことさら悪事のように騒ぐのは不思議だ」
I am not entirely clear on how exactly having some other name for massive institutionalized prostitution which included sexual slavery will somehow create a less evil image. True to form, Sankei dwells on this issue a little more, including the aforementioned quote and adding a few more, including:
中国や韓国の反発に対し「国益に沿って反日を利用し、国内をなだめつつ、とりあえずごねてみる作戦。（中国や韓国に）ただ頭を下げるのでは政治家として二流、三流」としている。
中山文科相は６月、静岡市で開かれたタウンミーティングで「従軍慰安婦という言葉は当時なかった。間違った記述が教科書からなくなってよかった」と述べたが、慰安婦の存在や苦痛は否定していない。
Here Sankei is adding her thoughts on the reaction of China and Korea, playing the history card to serve their own national interests, and criticizing Japanese politicians who refuse to be defiant. Providing some additional context, Sankei adds that Nakayama said in June that he was glad that comfort women had been removed from the textbooks since the word didn’t exist at the time. While I’m not sure what terms were or were not used during the war, note the connection being made between a squabble about the term – and discussion in textbooks of the important issue to which this term refers (according to various reports, the issue has made a mass disappearance from many if not all the major textbooks that are coming out this year).
I think you’re pointing to one of the main tactics used by revisionist historians: nitpick and disprove one particular detail in order to deny the existence of an entire historical event. This trite debate over the term seems very similar.
It would have been quite astonishing that her email should get national news coverage if it weren’t for the even more bizarre (and shameful) fact that the Education Minister should use her remarks in defense of his revisionist views. Where are the historians of Japan?
Yeah, I wonder where this 20 something women student is studying? Which school? I second CP’s injunction: Where are the Japan historians?
And why is a Minister quoting a graduate student anyway?
I think graduate students (both Japanese and non) reading this should start a letter campaign to Nakayama. What do you think? I can probably get someone to draft something in Japanese and we call all sign.
Here you go. Anyone interested in helping out?
A Campaign against Nariaki Nakayama’s Distortion of Japan’s Wartime History
Tak, wonderful! This is the way grass roots movements get started…it would be wonderful if this could get support amongst Japanese…where the campaign would have more effect. However, I would be happy to sign a letter.
Update on that page, for those interested. I’ve moved it to this url on blogspot and called it:
中山成彬文科大臣にメールを送ろう! Let’s Email Nakayama Nariaki a History Lesson!
Its a long title. And here’s the description.
In the next few days I’ll announced more publicly on my site, but for now, I’ve recruited a few friends and we’re slowly building the site.
ここって歴史ブログなのか政治ブログなのか、はたまた学生運動ブログなのかはっきりさせてください。
とりあえず歴史ブログではなさそうです。
Hi there ひとこと君, this is indeed a history blog, and history is full of issues which is deeply important today. Indeed, that is often what motivates people to study history. The politics of history is something that simply cannot be ignored. I’m sorry that you don’t understand that.
＞従軍慰安婦という言葉は）一部の日本人が自虐的にも戦後に作った。
吉田清治という人が作ったんですよ。
1） この問題に火を付けたのが、吉田清治の著書「私の戦争犯罪・朝鮮人連行強制記録」でした。しかし、千葉大学教授の秦郁彦氏が済州島に行って実際に調査したところ、吉田氏が慰安婦にするための女性を1000人近く徴用したとう事実はないことが判明しました。それに現地の新聞がすでに「吉田証言に該当する事実はない」と報道していたのです。
吉田証言は全くの嘘であることが証明されて、1996年に本人も「全てフィクションである」と認めています。
2） 自ら名乗り出た慰安婦について：この女性、金学順は「女子挺身隊」として連行などされていない事を、8月14日の記者会見で自ら暴露した。実際は、生活苦から義父によって民間の置屋に売られたという、ただの身内による身売りというのが実態であったことが判明。国家による組織的な強制連行とは関係ない。
そもそも「女子挺身隊」とは、昭和18年9月に閣議決定されたもので、金学順さんが17歳であった昭和14年には存在していない制度である。さらに「女子挺身隊」とは、販売店員、改札係、車掌、理髪師など、17職種の男子就業を禁止し、25歳未満の女子を動員したものであり慰安婦とは何の関係もない。しかしながら、この事実を朝日新聞が訂正することは一切なかった。
Comment Deleted from ボヤッキー Reason: For irrelevant insult of the Frog in a Well blog.
ボヤッキー: Critical comments are welcome when relevant to the posting or issues discussed. In answer to a question you posed elsewhere, this weblog has moderated comments due to spam and offensive or completely irrelevant postings. This is not a public bathroom wall. We welcome your critical comments (such as your last comment) even when we disagree with their contents.
In response to your comment above ボヤッキー I’m sorry that I can’t respond to the technical and detailed issue of the term and the controversy around it, I hope others can address the specific debate you are bringing up. However, I will reiterate the fact that the squabble over the term is being used to question the existence of a hugely important issue, that of comfort women (with whatever word you would like to use). I for one, am not prepared to ignore the oral testimony of many women to attest to being coerced into working as comfort women, even though many revisionists in Japan seem perfectly willing to believe that they are all inventing their stories of sexual slavery.
The issue of coercion, however, is merely one part of this tragic story, as I suggest. There are other important issues of the relationship between sex and war which deserve careful consideration.
“Critical comments are welcome ”
“I’m sorry that I can’t respond to the technical and detailed issue”
大事なことですよ。
一緒に議論しましょうよ。
“am not prepared to ignore the oral testimony of many women ”
全て受け入れるとか全て無視するとか極端なのは私も好みません。
ただ証言には裏付けが不可欠です。
もし私が私の祖母はローソンさんの祖父に暴行されたと言っただけであなたは素直に謝罪と賠償しますか？
ひとつ訂正です。
＞従軍慰安婦という言葉は）一部の日本人が自虐的にも戦後に作った。
日本ではじめて「従軍慰安婦」を戦争犯罪として世に広めたのが、
千田夏光著「従軍慰安婦」（1973年）および「続・従軍慰安婦」(1974年)です。
この本では、千田氏が「挺身隊」として動員された朝鮮人女性20万人のうち、5～7万人が
慰安婦にさせられたと書いています。しかし「挺身隊」とは軍需工場などへ勤労動員された者のことで
「慰安婦」とは全く別のものです。また、挺身隊員で慰安婦になれと強制された例は一つも確認されていません。
これは朝鮮の反日運動家が「挺身隊で連れて行かれる者は慰安婦にさせられる」というデマを流したのを、
千田氏がろくに検証もせずに書いてしまったようです。
千田夏光著の「従軍慰安婦」が1973年、
吉田清治著の「私の戦争犯罪・朝鮮人連行強制記録」が1983年
吉田証言は朝日新聞やテレビ朝日にたびたび登場したが、内容に疑問を持った方々
（中村粲氏、板倉由明氏、上杉千年氏ら）の検証によって、軍の命令系統から本人の経歴まで
全てが嘘であることが判明した。秦郁彦氏は、唯一場所と時間が特定されている済州島へ
現地調査に出かけたが老人たちに聞いても完全否定され、すでに調査を行っていた『済州島新聞』の
女性記者にも「何が目的でこんな作り話を書くのか？」と聞かれる始末であった。
この問題には、第三者としての証言者がいないということである。
previous postの自ら名乗り出た慰安婦、金学順さんの証言。
「生活が苦しくなった母親によって１４歳の時に平壌のあるキーセン検番（日本でいう置屋）に売られていった。
三年間の検番生活を終えた金さんが初めての就職だと思って、検番の義父に連れていかれた所が、
華北の日本軍３００名余りがいる部隊の前だった」「ハンギョレ新聞」’91年8月15日付
当時アジアでは生活苦のため子供を女衒に売るという行為は残念ながら普通にありました。
もちろん日本でもです。
当然売春も違法行為ではなく職業のひとつとして存在していました。
韓国では昨年新しい法律が出来て売春に対する規制が厳しくなりましたが、それまでは公然と行われ、とくに７０年代はキーセン外交という言葉に代表されるように重要な外貨獲得手段でした。
売春婦はビジネスウーマンと呼ばれ、社会的地位もそれなりにあったのです。
慰安婦なんて只の売春婦！ なにがＳＥＸ ＳＬＡＶＥだ！ ふざけるな！！
慰安婦をリクリートしていたのは、朝鮮人だ！ この募集広告に連絡先“許”氏って書いてあるだろ！
許(＝フォ)って姓は朝鮮人の姓だろうが！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
http://www010.upp.so-net.ne.jp/japancia/index.htm
zubuzubu: No one denies that Korean and Japanese private recruiters were involved. Also many women were recruited, especially in the earlier period, as “comfort women” and knew what kind of work this might entail.
It was still a form of sexual slavery since we have many documented cases of women being chased down or punished for attempting to escape the stations.
The fact that many 1) The Japanese military or others working on the instructions of the Japanese military were involved in many cases there is evidence for 2) many women were deceived when they were recruited, let to believe they were being recruited for factory and other work etc. 3) Many women were rounded up in press-gang style raids all make this atrocious system worth remembering and figures into the broader study of the relationship between sex, gender, and war.