First, a list of absolutes from the article:
Just step out into public view and you’ll feel it.
a Japanese student in any classroom
The Eye thus keeps Japanese classrooms quiet.
The Eye thus forces everyone to assume
By donning drab colors, effecting a sullen public mask and adopting unobtrusive behaviors like everyone else
NJ in Japan are naturally viewed as suspicious.
making everyone watch and police one another.
they’ll come back to Japan and plug right back in.
I make that eight very broad brush strokes.
if they happen to appeal to a desirable standard (e.g., tall, well-groomed, moneyed and male). They attract the attention of the Giggly Ingenue and Bored Cougar. In other words, they get “the look,” not The Eye.
From only the GI and BC, or do they 以心伝心ingly tell all The Other Eyes to switch to “the look” (surely “The Look”?) mode? Or does The Look outweigh The Eye? What’s the minimum recommended ratio of Looks to Eyes? What about for married people, gays, straight women or others who may have no interest in attention from a GI or BC?
As for the motley NJ who don’t fit that aforementioned desirable standard, The Eye eventually convinces them that they really are somehow deviant and undesirable.
He said “e.g.” rather than “i.e.”, so it’s not exclusive, but since he used “desirable” one would assume that this included other traditional measures of attractiveness like slim, full head of blonde hair, big nose, etc.
there are NJs who do “look Japanese” and can “pass” as such. By donning drab colors, effecting a sullen public mask and adopting unobtrusive behaviors like everyone else, they can escape The Eye.
Depressed zainichi goths get a free pass, but:
This time, however, shikata ga nai — there is no escape from The Eye. The only escape is to head back to the airport and exit Japanese society.
Not even the ultimate apologist’s line “If you don’t like it, go home”, but just “If you’re not God’s gift to women, go home”
This time last year he said:
And if you dare get critical? You face exclusionism, even from NJ themselves. The common retort to any criticism is, “Well, if you don’t like it here, why don’t you leave?”
With reasoned argument debased to the level of “love it or leave it,” the “like or dislike” ideological prism effectively becomes an intellectual prison.
Mr Arudou has painted his ideological prism fuligin.