I feel like these people are ignoring the context that most people in Japan are racist as fuck. It is more xenophobia (fear of outsiders/foreigners) than about physical traits or racial stereotypes like you see in the US, for example. For the most part, anyway.
It is not necessarily a fomented hatred for foreigners as much as it is a strong aversion against non-conformity. Modern Japanese culture and racial makeup is nearly homogenous, and so dealing with someone that doesn’t fit into that monolithic culture, doesn’t speak the language fluently, or is physically very different, etc. is a discomfort that many find annoying, scary, or anxiety inducing. Some to the point that they choose only to serve or interact with native Japanese people.
But it not being about hatred, per se, doesn’t really change the fact that, if you look different in Japan, you don’t speak fluent Japanese, you have an accent, etc. you’ll get treated worse. They regularly deny “foreigners”/“gaijin” (often including born-and-raised mixed-race Japanese citizens, “hāfu”) basic business services and housing. At minimum, you’ll get stares and thoughtless/ignorant questions and comments that can be very insulting. You may have trouble accessing shelter and services offered freely to native and typically appearing Japanese people. And worse, you may have legal troubles by police assuming you are a trouble maker by virtue of being different. There is a huge racial profiling problem with Japanese police.
There are not comprehensive anti-discriminatiom laws, or even a general government recognition of systemic racism, so you will likely have no legal recourse for the prejudice you would likely face there, too.
I am not generalizing people based on genetic traits, race, etc. I’m talking about the culture of a broad society. It is a documented systemic issue and sociological observation. Like saying that Victorian era people in the UK were sexually repressed. There is nothing intrinsic to Victorians that made them that way, and it certainly didn’t apply to everyone. But that was absolutely a significant part of the culture at the time.
X people are A. Y people can’t B. Z people are worse than C people. Where X, Y, and Z are races or racial traits, these are racist statements because they attribute intrinsic qualities to a racial group, or comparatively qualify there human value. Stating a fact of sociology can often be used to erroneously support such a racist statement. It is justifiable to feel uneasy about it for that reason. But the sociological fact isn’t racist in itself.
Being xenophobic in a culture where the differences between people is very small and nuanced is very common and part of human nature. Tribalism is an evolutionary adaptation that gave our ancestors an advantage when resource scarcity was a bigger issue. But it’s not needed anymore like it once was. And it takes cognitive effort to overcome that impulse. The more diverse that Japan becomes over time, the less xenophobia they will become. It is not a problem with Japanese people as a race. It is a consequence of their general isolation from regular, direct contact with other cultures and people.
Couldn’t Japanese people who discriminate against foreigners make the same argument about culture? The sign could be used to exclude based on assumptions of culture.
Yes, absolutely. In fact I believe that is exactly why they are doing it. When non-Japanese people come in, they don’t understand the unwritten cultural rules and expectations, they don’t have a great grasp of the language… it can be a challenge to serve people like that when everyone else just conforms implicitly. And when those people are a microscopic part of the population, that makes every interaction with them a rare and negative experience that makes the annoyance of it seem all the worse because you are never used to it. And the value of each interaction for that restaurant owner’s annoyance is a single meal served, so it isn’t worth it to them from that perspective.
I’m not saying I don’t understand that perspective. I do, 100%. But that’s not the only perspective here. The foreigner has a perspective and an experience too. That mindset of the restaurant owner, of protecting your personal comfort for one interaction, is a common one. That means that it’s not just this restaurant for this foreigner that they’re not welcome. It means that the would-be patron is denied in numerous interactions, services, and maybe even a livlihood. As are every other foreigner. Your personal comfort over one interaction shouldn’t outweigh that.
Think about Jim Crow laws. Why were they wrong? “Oh so you can’t eat at this diner. Big deal. He has a right to not serve you if he doesn’t want to.” For you it is just this diner, and you are choosing for yourself who to serve. For the black community, it was every diner, every bus, ever water fountain, redlined neighborhoods, sundown towns… it creates a cultural class system, a constant obstacle to participate in and succeed in society, and systematically holds one group down while proping up the class in power. The inequality is a problem, no matter your personal choice about your own business.
Again, I can understand why it may be a personal challenge for them and how they would rather just avoid that entirely. But it is still xenophobic/racist and still effects the object of their prejudice far greater than themselves. I don’t think it is right. And I think, if and when their demographics start to become less homogenous, there will be a major civil rights movement in Japan similar to the US’s and it will be a struggle. I’d rather see those in their culture start to recognize their xenophobia now, and begin to make efforts to correct it before the problem is bigger than it needs to be when that time comes.
And the literacy tests of the Jim Crowe era were just making sure people could read well enough to vote. It was educationalist, not racist. The purpose of this sign is to exclude non-native Japanese people.
Doesn’t say anything about race, just that you need to be able to read Japanese. Isn’t that more like linguism or something?
The assumption here is that if you can speak Japanese fluently then you are native Japanese.
if a non native speaker walks in I’d put money on at least getting some stinkeye if not just outright told to leave.
I feel like these people are ignoring the context that most people in Japan are racist as fuck. It is more xenophobia (fear of outsiders/foreigners) than about physical traits or racial stereotypes like you see in the US, for example. For the most part, anyway.
It is not necessarily a fomented hatred for foreigners as much as it is a strong aversion against non-conformity. Modern Japanese culture and racial makeup is nearly homogenous, and so dealing with someone that doesn’t fit into that monolithic culture, doesn’t speak the language fluently, or is physically very different, etc. is a discomfort that many find annoying, scary, or anxiety inducing. Some to the point that they choose only to serve or interact with native Japanese people.
But it not being about hatred, per se, doesn’t really change the fact that, if you look different in Japan, you don’t speak fluent Japanese, you have an accent, etc. you’ll get treated worse. They regularly deny “foreigners”/“gaijin” (often including born-and-raised mixed-race Japanese citizens, “hāfu”) basic business services and housing. At minimum, you’ll get stares and thoughtless/ignorant questions and comments that can be very insulting. You may have trouble accessing shelter and services offered freely to native and typically appearing Japanese people. And worse, you may have legal troubles by police assuming you are a trouble maker by virtue of being different. There is a huge racial profiling problem with Japanese police.
There are not comprehensive anti-discriminatiom laws, or even a general government recognition of systemic racism, so you will likely have no legal recourse for the prejudice you would likely face there, too.
Isn’t it ironic or perhaps hypocritical that you’re speaking about Japan in such generalities?
I am not generalizing people based on genetic traits, race, etc. I’m talking about the culture of a broad society. It is a documented systemic issue and sociological observation. Like saying that Victorian era people in the UK were sexually repressed. There is nothing intrinsic to Victorians that made them that way, and it certainly didn’t apply to everyone. But that was absolutely a significant part of the culture at the time.
X people are A. Y people can’t B. Z people are worse than C people. Where X, Y, and Z are races or racial traits, these are racist statements because they attribute intrinsic qualities to a racial group, or comparatively qualify there human value. Stating a fact of sociology can often be used to erroneously support such a racist statement. It is justifiable to feel uneasy about it for that reason. But the sociological fact isn’t racist in itself.
Being xenophobic in a culture where the differences between people is very small and nuanced is very common and part of human nature. Tribalism is an evolutionary adaptation that gave our ancestors an advantage when resource scarcity was a bigger issue. But it’s not needed anymore like it once was. And it takes cognitive effort to overcome that impulse. The more diverse that Japan becomes over time, the less xenophobia they will become. It is not a problem with Japanese people as a race. It is a consequence of their general isolation from regular, direct contact with other cultures and people.
Couldn’t Japanese people who discriminate against foreigners make the same argument about culture? The sign could be used to exclude based on assumptions of culture.
Yes, absolutely. In fact I believe that is exactly why they are doing it. When non-Japanese people come in, they don’t understand the unwritten cultural rules and expectations, they don’t have a great grasp of the language… it can be a challenge to serve people like that when everyone else just conforms implicitly. And when those people are a microscopic part of the population, that makes every interaction with them a rare and negative experience that makes the annoyance of it seem all the worse because you are never used to it. And the value of each interaction for that restaurant owner’s annoyance is a single meal served, so it isn’t worth it to them from that perspective.
I’m not saying I don’t understand that perspective. I do, 100%. But that’s not the only perspective here. The foreigner has a perspective and an experience too. That mindset of the restaurant owner, of protecting your personal comfort for one interaction, is a common one. That means that it’s not just this restaurant for this foreigner that they’re not welcome. It means that the would-be patron is denied in numerous interactions, services, and maybe even a livlihood. As are every other foreigner. Your personal comfort over one interaction shouldn’t outweigh that.
Think about Jim Crow laws. Why were they wrong? “Oh so you can’t eat at this diner. Big deal. He has a right to not serve you if he doesn’t want to.” For you it is just this diner, and you are choosing for yourself who to serve. For the black community, it was every diner, every bus, ever water fountain, redlined neighborhoods, sundown towns… it creates a cultural class system, a constant obstacle to participate in and succeed in society, and systematically holds one group down while proping up the class in power. The inequality is a problem, no matter your personal choice about your own business.
Again, I can understand why it may be a personal challenge for them and how they would rather just avoid that entirely. But it is still xenophobic/racist and still effects the object of their prejudice far greater than themselves. I don’t think it is right. And I think, if and when their demographics start to become less homogenous, there will be a major civil rights movement in Japan similar to the US’s and it will be a struggle. I’d rather see those in their culture start to recognize their xenophobia now, and begin to make efforts to correct it before the problem is bigger than it needs to be when that time comes.
Ethnocentrism is still a problem bent on bigotry. “Spayk Anglush” in much of the US is the same thing.
Anglush?! This here’s 'Murica! We talk 'Murican 'round these parts!
ableism?
I don’t think not speaking Japanese counts as a disability.
I’m disabled. I can’t watch anime without subtitles.
It does in Japan.
deleted by creator
And the literacy tests of the Jim Crowe era were just making sure people could read well enough to vote. It was educationalist, not racist. The purpose of this sign is to exclude non-native Japanese people.