Someone recounted how her friend, while returning home one night in Japan, encountered a local man who followed her with his pants down and jerking off. Said person was using this unfortunate encounter, together with all those weird Japanese variety shows, to conclude that the Japanese are very perverse.
I don't know how late the girl was in getting home or how she was dressed when the encounter happened, although I do know she is half Caucasian - which in Japan makes one more prone to victimisation due to the exoticity; I know two white British girls who had a similar encounter in the wee hours at an entertainment district in Kansai. But this made me wonder if dressing, time and location can ever be reasons to sympathise less with those who meet with perverts or violence, and got me thinking about Slut Walk.
It is precisely this sort of thinking that Slut Walk is campaigning against. The message is that women have the right to wear what they want and should not shoulder blame for sexual violence because of their dressing, nor should their clothes be an invitation for violence. I have always felt that rape is one of the worst things that could happen to a person, and can't even begin to imagine the trauma of sexual violence. I also agree that one has the right to wear what they wish. Yet, I wonder if, just as hanging your fancy camera round your neck or having your wallet stick out of your bag identifies you as an easier target for theft than the person next to you with no valuables in sight, would revealing dressing make one appear to be an easier target compared to someone dressed differently?
The blame still lies with the perpetrator - I'm not saying that victims are inviting violence or asking to be victimised - but as long as they exist, criminals will choose their targets. There has to be some form of discrimination process, and I'm pretty sure that in the case of sexual violence, a short skirt or tiny top - both of which provide 'easier access' - together with the location and time of day are factors, regardless of the (supposed) rights of people to be wherever they want whenever they want and dressed however they want.
As for the pervert in Japan - I hesitate to say that there are more perverts in Japan than elsewhere, as I think the variety shows on tv are an indication of differing social perceptions on what is acceptable and what is not. Incidences of rape and sexual violence in Japan is lower than in many other countries, and frankly I'm quite happy for people to watch 'sick' programmes if that means my safety on the streets - certainly the actual act of sexual violence is more sick than public masturbation at a distance. I also know Japanese people whom, from all appearances, are as (un)perverse as you and me. The point is, you can't judge one's private persona by their public face, and I think it's unfair to write off an entire country just from one (second-hand) experience. There certainly was no such judgement from the two British girls I know.
0 comments:
Post a Comment