Category Archives: Online Sources

The current state of microaggressions in US universities

This is slightly off-topic, but perhaps on-topic to explain where losing the racism and completing the transaction mindset is coming from.

The Coddling of the American Mind

I’ve now read it through, and it perhaps provides an explanation why people spit out the “apologist” label so readily, and similarly why the “paid shill” is used.

So that’s a vote for Hokkaido’s Tomari nuclear power plant restart then

I see in today’s Hokkaido Prefectural election, the anti-nuclear candidate Noriyuki Sato lost. A couple of weeks ago I saw him on the television where he said:


So, since he lost, he will accept the voice of the people. Bonus points to anyone who finds him contradicting that stance in post-election interviews.


Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose – early 20th century microaggression

In the San Francisco Call newspaper, 24th September 1910, there was a rather entertaining tale of a gaijin manhandling a “little brown [‘yellow’ surely?] trainboy” for looking funny at his wife. I present the conclusion, but note I might have made a small mistake or two:

But he is going to have his revenge. He is going back to Hawaii, where he will write a Japan Times column advising tourists to stay away from Japan, telling them that they can not place any faith in weeaboos’ alluring descriptions or any reliance on the Japanese brand of civilization.

Further entertainment and a tidied-up transcription may be found on reddit.

The Popcorn Thread

Or, doctoring Debito Arudou.

First, I actually do think that the current Wikipedia article is pretty awful, but converting it to his CV, as the not-at-all sock puppets are trying to do, is not the way to go and is certainly not going to fly. I’d kill most of the Early Life and Divorce sections, make the publications into a bullet list and trash the academic papers section – from what I understand, publishing three papers on almost identical topics within a short period (“Embedded Racism …fill in the blank… Critical Race Theory“) is frowned upon – and the criticism section could do with pruning. Indeed, for such a minor figure, I think the Simple English entry is enough.

So, let us go back in time to 2008, where the first attempt at editing his own article resulted in this:

 I’m just supposed to shut up and take it by people who won’t take any personal responsibility for what they say or reveal who they are, even when there is a potential conflict of interest with an editor and a source (in other words, the COI is perpetually placed on me, never you). The process here is neither fair nor professional. And I’ll have no part of it since it will have no part of me.

(My highlighting)

Fast forward to August of this year, when Sweetandloveable and Mister_Mtzplk appear and start favourably editing various pages relating to Dr Arudo – notably, despite having lots of detailed information about him at their fingertips, somehow both manage to spell his name without the final “u”, and despite both having lots to say about him, their editing trails never cross.

Now, things heat up on the 30th of September when Mr Googles adds a little about the then Mr Arudou getting fired instead of quitting so he could get unemployment insurance. After this entry, by some strange quirk of fate, Dr Arudou (or someone else with the keys to decides to edit the source of this text, and by an even more quirky quirk of fate, Mister_Mtzplk reports this change just five minutes after Eido says Firefox reports the last edit time as. I have also double-checked this with Chrome, one of the HTTP Response headers is “Last-Modified: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 02:08:13 GMT”.

Thus I am led to conclude that even if we assume that S&L and MM were previously operating independently of Dr Arudou, he must surely have been made aware of the Wikipedia edit war at this point in time, and I would expect him to recall issues of Conflict of Interest and be aware that S&L and MM were potentially breaking these guidelines.

Next, the page “gatekeeper” or whatever it is called in Wiki-world manages to rub S&L up the wrong way:

These wikipedia edit disputes really get on my nerves. I’m not used to them (I know, I’m new here, which Oddexit keeps pointing out) I’m trying to assume good faith in editors, but I’m having a lot of trouble.

I felt the appeals to “good faith” were a bit out of place, as S&L is not declaring their COI.

So, Eido decides to take things to the next level by calling for a sock-puppet investigation on MM, which seems a reasonable step to me – let’s wait and see how that turns out. This appears to annoy the good Doctor, as he calls in a retaliatory Request for Arbitration against Eido and Oddexit, reactivating his account after a six-year hiatus. However, a cursory reading of Wikipedia rules is that an RFA is a last resort after other resolution means fail, so not surprisingly a third party tells him to start from the beginning:

Maybe WP:DRN or WP:ANI should be tried first before arbitration.

Now, the interesting thing about Dr A’s RFA is that he somehow omits to mention S&L and MM’s roles (who co-incidentally have fallen silent) in the dispute or his awareness of a potential COI since, as I indicated above, it appears he made an edit to in direct response to an edit on Wikipedia. I also await with bated breath his promised “Mr Googles is a big meanie”:

Will discuss Eido Inoue’s WP:COI based upon published personal animus towards BLP subject later.

UPDATE 16th October:

After going strangely quiet, and after a not-too-surprising rejection of Dr A’s arbitration request, he now posts this epic to the Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboard. The post includes mentions of both Japologism and Tepido, with the Tepido link being prefixed with:

the forums that [Eido] contributes to engage in cyberbullying and cyberstalking

The destination of the link, however, is an article where I unmask James Grey (now Jim Di Griz, one of Dr A’s favoured commenters) as a troll. Furthermore, there is a second link that leads to a dead page on a rather strange site.

There is also perhaps an unintentional revelation of motivations that further suggest Mister_Mtzplk is a sock-/meat-puppet:

Even after I removed the section in question from my website, in order to see how Wikipedia would enforce its own rules, Eido decided to use the Wayback machine as a source, which violates WP:SELFPUB. For if Wayback becomes the template for citing internet-archived self-published sources when current sources exist, issues will arise. This has been raised on the Talk page by Mister Mtzplk

Eido also suggested to me privately that perhaps Dr A is unaware of the sock-puppet investigation. We still haven’t got the bottom of the popcorn bucket, folks!

Calling the Dokdo Crusader!

I couldn’t help noticing parallels with Japan in this story from Korea, right down to these photos:

The story also has the old chestnut:

If I took a seat, the seat next to me would often remain empty even during rush hours in crowded subways

Paging Yokohama’s Osaka pal! (I note also that that guy’s son blamed his inability to get a convenience store job on his dreadlocks, not on the colour of his skin; what a Blapologist!)

There’s also the hard to fathom being strangled by a Samsung employee in a taxi (how did that all come about – the lack of details lessens the impact, I feel) and this familiar statement:

the police refused to take any action on the grounds that “racial discrimination does not exist in Korea.”

There’s more on this reddit thread, including a link to a quite impressive Koreapologist:

“The billions of pieces of human genetic code sequenced thus far are most notable for what they do not appear to contain – a genetic test to tell one race of people from another. All scientific finds point to the conclusion that race doesn’t exist”
This means the Bible is correct and there is no such thing as racism, just hatred for others ― and that is sin. Korea is not racist and racism is not serious in this country; sin is, and that is not limited to the Korean people, for the westerner is as guilty as those they falsely accuse. 

Umm, if you say so.


More dodgy science and dodgier Kyodo reporting

Japan Times reprinted a useless Kyodo press release bordering on Fookooshimar. Paragraph two starts:

One of the experts, Timothy Mousseau …

I think I can stop here. The article is here, but I don’t know what is the difference between a full article and a “symposium article” as this is entitled.

There’s also an interesting article on the Pale Grass Blue Butterfly – well, what is more interesting is this criticism – where in a sub-section entitled “Science and Politics” the author rails against the apologists:

The Nature News article (Callaway 2013) may be wrongly interpreted to imply that we (scientists who study this topic seriously) are mad scientists who do not care about people living in the Fukushima area (Steen and Wayne 2013), partly because our data may “scare people” there.

I cannot access the referenced articles, but that smells of a straw man!

Official web site states basically no welfare for gaijin

It says:

Can workers from abroad get benefits […]?

Usually people who come […] to work can’t get public funds. ‘Public funds’ means most welfare benefits and local authority housing. You might be able to get free hospital treatment and your children will be allowed to go to state school.



Before someone sends the link to with a suitably angry rant, I should point out that this is what the UK says. Furthermore, even EU citizens coming to the UK will soon find their dole money cut faster than the natives.

Other news like over half of British female MPs feeling discriminated against in Parliament brings other ranting from the usual peanut gallery about Japan into focus.

This, of course, does not excuse Japan, but before people make offensive, discriminatory or racist comments about Japan, perhaps they ought to educate themselves on how their own country treats people in similar situations.


Should I really give Vice a link to their stupid Fookooshimar nonsense

I’ll put a nofollow on this link where we see that an anti-nuclear activist (Ms Takenouchi) said a pro-nuclear (well, I’m not sure of their exact stance, but to most Fookooshimars, anything not death-filled is pro-) activist (Ms Ando) was “host[ing] human experiments in Fukushima“, so Ms Ando decided to talk to the police about the defamation. Cue much outrage about censorship, victimisation, etc, etc. I’m also reminded (but let’s not go there) that the writers credited for this article have been involved in a similar situation…

Anyway, Ms Ando represents an NPO that according to the article:

Fukushima Ethos encourages residents to continue living in contaminated areas as long as decontamination procedures and radiation measurements continue to be done.

No biases there from the journalist. If you’d rather read the NPO’s own statement of policies, it is here. Some legal expert or other said:

If all debates about nuclear energy in this country are going to become grounds for criminal investigations, freedom of speech will vanish.

Try not calling people human experimenters to avoid being grounds for investigation!

In Reporters Without Borders’ press freedom rankings for 2013, Japan fell to a new low of 59th place, due in part to the Special Secrets Act passed in the middle of the night in December, and “the ban imposed by the authorities on independent coverage of any topic related directly or indirectly to the accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.” 

I think we’ve previously criticised the RSF quotes here, and I don’t really see what the point in mentioning the middle of the night is, and if my memory serves me correctly, it was just after 9 pm. Can anyone else recall?

Dolphipologist gets his blowhole assaulted

There was a story published in Newsweek that I thought took an interesting look at Taiji from another angle, that of an older resident. I quite enjoyed the article, but the comments section is… oh dear. Many of the dolphin-huggers posting there are really quite, quite nasty to anyone who doesn’t agree with their point of view, although admittedly there is a Japanese (or pretending to be Japanese) troll there to wind them up.

I liked this comment:

Those poor dolphins are foreigners. They are citizens of the world. They are not subject to that kind of arrogant self centered thinking that decimates the wonderful beings that inhabit OUR planet just so that some SELF RIGHTEOUS Japanese butchers can save face.

And this:

Dolphin are sacred, and whales keep a secret… There are 8000 whales keeping a secret sign and those signs together can do a drawing… this drawing has powerful magic and then whale can save the earth with this drawing

And of course, many commenters conclude that the reporter must have been on the take from the Japanese government.

Critical Race Theory paper criticism

Eido tweeted about this paper, Racist Racism: Complicating Whiteness Through the Privilege & Discrimination of Westerners in Japan. I’ve had a read, although I had to give up about halfway through, and some of the social science content is way over my head.

The first thing that struck me was that she footnotes a certain Hawaiiian almost as much as he does himself. The next thing I noticed in the footnotes was that there are a lot of blogs quoted, many of dubious quality, like the charming Tokyo Scum Report.

Now, getting to the meat of the document, we get stuff like this (Page 5):

Even those who naturalize and forsake their original nationalities and names fare no better: Public establishments refuse access to those who look foreign, including naturalized citizens, local governments have been known to oppose giving them suffrage.

That text reads very much as if the them (my italics) refers to naturalised citizens, but the footnotes points towards, where the title is “Resolution against NJ Suffrage”. The paragraph carries on:

For example, the highest court has ruled that public employers are permitted to refuse awarding senior posts to minorities (even those native-born), because they do not have the right to hold positions of authority over “real” natives.

Utterly wrong. The paragraph has established she is talking about naturalised citizens, but that court case was regarding Zainichi.

Later on Page 24, she talks about the Tottori ordinance on foreigner human rights, and says:

Notably, the measure has been removed from Tottori Prefecture’s legislative record.

Utterly wrong again. She takes Mr Arudou at face value when he failed to search Google.

I nearly threw my PC out the window when I got to Page 16, where there is a three-page “quote” that read like the first chapter of In Appropriate. Looking at the footnote for it, I read:

This narrative is based on personal experiences, internet postings, information disseminated by human rights activists in Japan, and the author’s interviews with numerous gaijin conducted in the summer of 2012. Experience-based narrative (personal, others’, and even fictional) often contributes significantly to CRT analysis.

So, any old bollocks cobbled up from random internet quotes and anecdotes is material for proving whatever it is she is trying to prove?