Friday, March 17, 2006

Just Interesting Somehow

I just happened across this controversy, and it ... I don't know, it just seemed funny. Here's the tip of the iceberg, from Japan:
A pioneer in gender studies and author of numerous books on the subject, Prof. Chizuko Ueno was to give a lecture on human rights in the city of Kokubunji. Her talk was vetoed in the planning stage due to pressure from the Tokyo Metropolitan government apparently because of fears that in her lecture she might use the words "gender-free," which are synonymous in Japan with "gender equal." The Tokyo Metropolitan government is on record as being opposed to the use of the term. Ueno sees the suppression of "gender free" as part of a conservative backlash against "the collapse of gender boundaries" by politicians such as Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara and LDP presidential hopeful Shinzo Abe. Ueno will speak at the FCCJ about her dispute with Ishihara and answer questions about the state of gender relations in Japan today.

Author of "Nationalism and Gender" (published by TransPacific Press 2004) Ueno is a prolific writer of both books and articles in Japanese. She has taught at Columbia University as well as universities in Canada, Germany and Mexico. Professional Luncheon: Political Backlash in Japan Against Gender Equality

Well, that is a ... very brief ... account. A fuller telling of the story is hidden behind a registration procedure that I didn't want to go through, but I did find a blogger who reproduced an article from the Japan Times Online. Here's some of it:
Last year's cancellation of lectures on human rights in Kokubunji, Tokyo, has pitted key feminist scholar Chizuko Ueno and free-speech advocates against conservatives in the Tokyo Metropolitan Government opposed to the use of "gender-free" -- a term whose definition varies but somehow conjures up negative images.

Experts say the cancellation reflects a backlash by conservative Japanese against the changing roles of men and women.

The Kokubunji Municipal Government planned last summer to hold 10 lectures on human rights -- a project sponsored by the metropolitan government -- and chose Ueno, a professor of women's studies at the University of Tokyo, to teach the course.

Metropolitan officials then pressured the western Tokyo suburb to ensure lecturers did not mention "gender-free" issues, according to both Tokyo and Kokubunji. The course was axed in August.

"I myself do not use the term gender-free, simply because it has not been adopted by most gender studies scholars in the international academic community," Ueno told reporters Monday.

She said she has no objection to other people using whatever terms they deem appropriate for promoting gender equality, but she strongly objects to official agencies banning the use of any words in public, unless they are discriminatory or hate-generating expressions.

Since the mid-1990s in Japan, "gender-free," which has been interchangeable with "gender equality," carries the concept of being free from sexual differences in a social and cultural context.

But some quarters regard gender-free as a denial of the differences between males and females, and of traditional family values, and as a way to promote what they consider radical sex education.

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party [this is the name of the conservative party in Japan? JimK] said it has received 3,500 reports of alleged "gender-free" activities that were deemed problematic.

According to the LDP's Web site, schools have had fifth-graders of both sexes share the same sleeping quarters on trips and conducted sex education classes using dolls with sex organs, drawing complaints for being too radical. The Tokyo government also claimed teachers had male and female students undergo medical checkups together.

The metropolitan board of education announced in August 2004 that Tokyo would not use the term "gender-free" in its activities, claiming the concept is sometimes misused to ignore the fact that men and women are different.

The metropolitan government thus told Kokubunji that it would not sponsor the course if the city was not sure if Ueno would avoid the term, said Shinichi Egami of Tokyo's Office of Education.

But Tetsuo Saito, director of the Kokubunji-run Honda Community Center who was in charge of planning the lectures, said he told metropolitan officials he believed Ueno would not take up "gender-free" because the theme was human rights.

Saito said he voluntarily dropped the course because Tokyo officials remained unconvinced that the concept would not be broached.

Can you imagine living in society where the city cancels a speech because the speaker just might use a term that conservatives don't approve of? Even when the speaker doesn't like the term and doesn't plan to use it, and the term doesn't mean what they say it means anyway?

Can you imagine that?

13 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Can you imagine living in society where the city cancels a speech because the speaker just might use a term that conservatives don't approve of?"

I can imagine one where they cancel speeches because of terms liberals don't approve of. It happens here in America all the time. It's called "political correctness"- it started on college campuses and has been around for awhile.

March 17, 2006 4:25 PM  
Anonymous PasserBy said...

... OK, good, you got him, now yank up on that pole to set that hook ... good, good, give him some line, good ... yes, isn't that fun?

PB

March 17, 2006 4:37 PM  
Anonymous David S. Fishback said...

Have you ever heard Jim K support cancellation of speeches by conservatives in public forums? I haven't.

Indeed, Jim has been very supportive of having diverse views on the CAC.

March 17, 2006 5:04 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

And when a lunatic like Ward Churchill is allowed to speak, the Republicans go into a frenzy, yet when Ann Coulter is on her usual speaking tour, calling liberals traitors and child molesters, that's just fine and dandy. Yet no liberal has ever demanded she not be allowed to speak.

Wyatt, your sense of victimization is pathetic.

March 17, 2006 7:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

David, I didn't say and didn't mean to imply that Jim hasn't supported free speech. I was saying that the phenonmena of trying to shut your opponent up is widespread- and equal oppoortunity. I've read many stories where liberals groups try to get a scheduled speech by a conservative cancelled. I've never heard of the other way around here.

March 18, 2006 7:24 AM  
Anonymous Daisy said...

Anon said, "I've read many stories where liberals groups try to get a scheduled speech by a conservative cancelled. I've never heard of the other way around here."

Missed this, did you?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A63399-2004Sep30?language=printer

March 18, 2006 10:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Couldn't get the link to take, Daisy. I assume its an example of a conservative group trying to cancel a speech.

I didn't say it never happens, just that its more commonly a liberal tactic. Here's an example: at their conventions, Democratic usually don't allow pro-life speakers, Republicans usually include pro-choice speakers.

Openness to diverse thought is, generally, a conservative characteristic.

March 18, 2006 11:27 AM  
Anonymous Daisy said...

Try this link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63399-2004Sep30.html

That openness to diverse thought you claim conservatives exhibit is a crock. The two who are now sinking from the top of the conservative compost heap only speak to hand picked audiences and tell the world "it's my way or the highway." Some conservatives go so far as to call diversity of thought "aiding the enemy."

Oh yeah. That's openness, big time! NOT

March 18, 2006 2:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It worked, Daisy. Yeah, I do remeber that come to think of it. I think the objection to Moore was more than just liberalism but maybe not. You do agree this happens frequently to conservative campus speakers, do you not?

As for your other comment, I don't think selecting an audience to speak to is the same thing as trying to prevent others from speaking.

March 18, 2006 3:07 PM  
Anonymous daisy said...

"I don't think selecting an audience to speak to is the same thing as trying to prevent others from speaking."

If you won't even let someone have a seat in the hall, you will not hear their diverse thoughts.

Unlike your claim, keeping non-conservatives outside the hall during tax-payer financed speeches by elected officials demonstrates a complete lack of "openness to diverse thought."

Enjoy it while you can but by all means try not to get too dizzy from all that spinning you do my nameless friend.

March 18, 2006 3:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sure, Daisy. What's with the 'tude?

March 18, 2006 3:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sure, Daisy. What's with the 'tude?

March 18, 2006 3:45 PM  
Anonymous Daisy said...

Sure anĂ³nimo, the nationwide 'tude is fatigue at being lied to over and over again. Now we've got you here, claiming conservatives welcome diverse thought. What a crock!

What's with the mask?

March 18, 2006 4:07 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home