Condom used by Japanese soldiers against Comfort Women

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Post by Penn44 » 10 Nov 2006 23:58

Kim Sung wrote: In regard to the Japanese war crimes, this is the second time we have found an evidence of Japanese war crimes. This is a very important discovery. For 61 years, we've found just two evidences of Japanese war crimes.


Maybe this is a cultural misunderstanding of what constitutes "evidence" admissible in courts in various nations.

I don't see any evidence provided to support the claim that this particular condom was used in a specific liasion with a comfort woman.

I don't image any Western historian or court considering this as "evidence."

Penn44


.

User avatar
Kim Sung
Member
Posts: 5039
Joined: 28 May 2005 13:36
Location: The Last Confucian State

Post by Kim Sung » 11 Nov 2006 00:55

David Thompson wrote:We already have several open threads on modern Japanese attitudes to Japanese war crimes in WWII, so I'll leave this material here.

If anyone has any further sourced information on the topic of "Comfort Women" not already covered in the various other open H&WC "Comfort Women" threads, please post it. Otherwise, we can move on. The other "Comfort Women" threads can be seen at:

U.S. House Takes Japan to Task Over Comfort Women
viewtopic.php?t=107989
Japan's Comfort Women (and US Comfort Women)
viewtopic.php?t=102556
Japan's Crimes Against Women
viewtopic.php?t=37660
The Story Of The Comfort Women
viewtopic.php?t=52431
Comfort Women Brothel - Torn Down Or Protected?
viewtopic.php?t=52429


I've already read all the posts in all these threads before. But I was careful in opening a new thread because it will cause a controversy. As you know, we don't any decisive evidence except former comfort women's accounts to prove Japan's engagement in exploitation of sex slaves.

Because the Japanese think comfort women issue was fabricated and all documents related to it was deliberately fabricated by Korean and Chinese governments, we are in desperate need of evidences, for example, documents written by the Japanese governments.

User avatar
Kim Sung
Member
Posts: 5039
Joined: 28 May 2005 13:36
Location: The Last Confucian State

Post by Kim Sung » 11 Nov 2006 01:06

David Thompson wrote:the drift was occasioned by tonyh's challenge to Kim Sung at viewtopic.php?p=977318#977318


Because I already told tonyh enough in previous threads why his view isn't persuasive, I'd like to cencentrate comfort women issue here.

viewtopic.php?p=941751#941751

User avatar
Kim Sung
Member
Posts: 5039
Joined: 28 May 2005 13:36
Location: The Last Confucian State

Post by Kim Sung » 11 Nov 2006 01:18

Penn44 wrote:Maybe this is a cultural misunderstanding of what constitutes "evidence" admissible in courts in various nations.

I don't see any evidence provided to support the claim that this particular condom was used in a specific liasion with a comfort woman.

I don't image any Western historian or court considering this as "evidence."

Penn44


.

Whatever you think, it is your freedom.

What western historians or courts consider as "evidence" is considered by most of the Japanese politicians or courts as products of deliberate fabrication. Can we call it a cultural difference?

User avatar
Beppo Schmidt
Member
Posts: 4324
Joined: 14 May 2003 02:05
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Beppo Schmidt » 11 Nov 2006 05:11

Just finding a WWII-era Japanese condom does not tell us anything about who it was used with. It very well could have been used with a comfort woman....or it could have been used with a girlfriend, or some (consensual) one-night-stand. We know absolutely nothing about who this condom comes from. It's like showing a picture of a German gun and using it as evidence of the Holocaust.

User avatar
Kim Sung
Member
Posts: 5039
Joined: 28 May 2005 13:36
Location: The Last Confucian State

Post by Kim Sung » 11 Nov 2006 05:27

Beppo Schmidt wrote:Just finding a WWII-era Japanese condom does not tell us anything about who it was used with. It very well could have been used with a comfort woman....or it could have been used with a girlfriend, or some (consensual) one-night-stand. We know absolutely nothing about who this condom comes from. It's like showing a picture of a German gun and using it as evidence of the Holocaust.

I don't agree. Basically, condoms marked Dotsugeki Ichiban were used exclusively against confort women. A picture of condom is completely different from that of a German gun. With a German gun, a Wehrmacht soldier could have done a lot of things; shooting Jews, fighting against Soviet partisans, fighting against American soldiers and hunting wild animals. But a Japanese military condom is different.

The Japanese Imperial Army officially provided Japanese soldiers with the original condom called Dotsugeki Ichiban (Attack Champion) to use in comfort women brothels during World War II. In some rare cases, a few lucky Japanese soldiers might have taken and used military condoms with their girl friends in Japan. But not many.

Former comfot women have said that they witnessed Dotsugeki Ichiban on the condoms used by Japanese soldiers. It is now proven that their accounts were accurate.

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Post by Penn44 » 12 Nov 2006 10:39

Kim Sung wrote:Former comfot women have said that they witnessed Dotsugeki Ichiban on the condoms used by Japanese soldiers. It is now proven that their accounts were accurate.


Again, athough I believe the comfort women's accounts to be true, condom or not, your resort to condom use as evidence is weak, it won't hold, and could break at any moment. Some revisionist could say that these comfort women learned of the condom name from other sources.

There must be other collaborating evidence available to substantiate the comfort women's case.

Penn44


.
Last edited by Penn44 on 12 Nov 2006 10:57, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Post by Penn44 » 12 Nov 2006 10:56

Within a Japanese civil court, what is the plaintiff's burden of proof?

David can correct me, within US civil court, the plaintiff is required to show only a preponderance of evidence (as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case) to support their case. If women, from many different countries, not just Korea, at about the same time shortly after the war give testimony that they were used as comfort women, I think this collection of individual stories from different lands is sufficient "proof" that the Japanese employed comfort women.

"Proving" that the Japanese military employed comfort women is relatively simple. However, I think it is more difficult for a comfort woman to prove that she herself was employed as a comfort woman, and that two, that she was involuntary forced to be one.

Again, the fact that the Japanese employed comfort women is a fact in the most reasonable minds; the problem for individual comfort women is proving their own, individual cases. The resort to condoms as evidence just makes the comfort women case appear like it is grasping for straws to support its case.

Penn44

.

User avatar
Kim Sung
Member
Posts: 5039
Joined: 28 May 2005 13:36
Location: The Last Confucian State

Post by Kim Sung » 12 Nov 2006 12:54

One can't compare Japanese courts to US courts which have a different system. If it had been in America, most of the atrocities could have been admitted and victims could have gotten enough reparations. In Japanese courts, such a logic has no meaning.

Although a lot of former comfort women from different countries insist that they were involuntarily forced to become comfort women, Japanese courts consider them just employed prositiutes (getting some salary) during the war. There is no desicive evidence (documents written by the Japanese authorities) that can prove that they were forced into prostitution. Collective accounts have no meaning in Japanese courts where judges have quite chauvinist mindset, influenced by general mood in the Japanese society.

But the mark Dotsugeki Ichiban has an important point. Look at the mark instead of condom itself. If the comfort women really had been voluntary employees to the Japanese army, the Japanese wouldn't have put Dotsugeki Ichiban on their condoms. Dotsugeki Ichiban symbolizes forced mass rape which refutes Japanese' insistence that they didn't forcefully exploited sex slaves. If they really had been paid sex workers as the Japanese insist, the Japanese wouldn't have marked such an insulting mark on the condoms.

ChristopherPerrien
Member
Posts: 7023
Joined: 26 Dec 2002 00:58
Location: Mississippi

Post by ChristopherPerrien » 12 Nov 2006 21:04

Kim Sung wrote:One can't compare Japanese courts to US courts which have a different system. If it had been in America, most of the atrocities could have been admitted and victims could have gotten enough reparations. In Japanese courts, such a logic has no meaning.

Although a lot of former comfort women from different countries insist that they were involuntarily forced to become comfort women, Japanese courts consider them just employed prositiutes (getting some salary) during the war. There is no desicive evidence (documents written by the Japanese authorities) that can prove that they were forced into prostitution. Collective accounts have no meaning in Japanese courts where judges have quite chauvinist mindset, influenced by general mood in the Japanese society.

But the mark Dotsugeki Ichiban has an important point. Look at the mark instead of condom itself. If the comfort women really had been voluntary employees to the Japanese army, the Japanese wouldn't have put Dotsugeki Ichiban on their condoms. Dotsugeki Ichiban symbolizes forced mass rape which refutes Japanese' insistence that they didn't forcefully exploited sex slaves. If they really had been paid sex workers as the Japanese insist, the Japanese wouldn't have marked such an insulting mark on the condoms.


I have seen some pretty suggestive and vulgar stuff on condom packages in my time. And at the risk of sounding "racist" ,the Japanese view on prostitution and sex-crimes can be different from other cultures. So such writing is not so suprising to me, especially given the era, it comes from :roll: :lol: . The condom itself is not "proof" of Japanese warcrimes, it is "collaborating evidence" that sub-stanciates victims' accounts.

Chris

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Post by Penn44 » 13 Nov 2006 05:56

Kim Sung wrote:One can't compare Japanese courts to US courts which have a different system. If it had been in America, most of the atrocities could have been admitted and victims could have gotten enough reparations. In Japanese courts, such a logic has no meaning.


One can always compare two legal systems or any two objects for that matter in order to reveal similarities and differences. Additionally, I used the US civil court example as a starting point to ask the question what does the Japanese civil courts consider evidence. My approach is entirely legitimate.

Kim Sung wrote:Although a lot of former comfort women from different countries insist that they were involuntarily forced to become comfort women, Japanese courts consider them just employed prositiutes (getting some salary) during the war. There is no desicive evidence (documents written by the Japanese authorities) that can prove that they were forced into prostitution. Collective accounts have no meaning in Japanese courts where judges have quite chauvinist mindset, influenced by general mood in the Japanese society..


So, your claim is that Japanese courts will not consider collective claims because of national reasons. My question for the general readership is this, do Japanese courts or Japanese legal tradition consider collective accounts at all?

Penn44

.

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Post by Penn44 » 13 Nov 2006 06:03

ChristopherPerrien wrote:I have seen some pretty suggestive and vulgar stuff on condom packages in my time. And at the risk of sounding "racist" ,the Japanese view on prostitution and sex-crimes can be different from other cultures. So such writing is not so suprising to me, especially given the era, it comes from :roll: :lol: . The condom itself is not "proof" of Japanese warcrimes, it is "collaborating evidence" that sub-stanciates victims' accounts.

Chris


I concur with ChristopherPerrien regarding the logos of condums and that the logos of condoms are insufficient proof that a war crime occurred. I doubt a French tickler condom really came from France or that it ever tickled anyone.

Penn44

.

User avatar
Penn44
Banned
Posts: 4214
Joined: 26 Jun 2003 06:25
Location: US

Post by Penn44 » 13 Nov 2006 06:10

Kim Sung wrote:But the mark Dotsugeki Ichiban has an important point. Look at the mark instead of condom itself. If the comfort women really had been voluntary employees to the Japanese army, the Japanese wouldn't have put Dotsugeki Ichiban on their condoms. Dotsugeki Ichiban symbolizes forced mass rape which refutes Japanese' insistence that they didn't forcefully exploited sex slaves. If they really had been paid sex workers as the Japanese insist, the Japanese wouldn't have marked such an insulting mark on the condoms.


A general question for Kim Sung:

Do you claim that all comfort women were involuntary sex workers?

Penn44

.

User avatar
Kim Sung
Member
Posts: 5039
Joined: 28 May 2005 13:36
Location: The Last Confucian State

Post by Kim Sung » 13 Nov 2006 06:36

Penn44 wrote:So, your claim is that Japanese courts will not consider collective claims because of national reasons. My question for the general readership is this, do Japanese courts or Japanese legal tradition consider collective accounts at all?

Penn44

.


Japanese courts or Japanese legal tradition consider collective accounts as evidences in other cases. But in case of their wartime victims' reparations they generally don't consider collective accounts as evidences. I already explained why they take different attitudes at the same kinds of evidences.

User avatar
Kim Sung
Member
Posts: 5039
Joined: 28 May 2005 13:36
Location: The Last Confucian State

Post by Kim Sung » 13 Nov 2006 06:39

Penn44 wrote:I concur with ChristopherPerrien regarding the logos of condums and that the logos of condoms are insufficient proof that a war crime occurred. I doubt a French tickler condom really came from France or that it ever tickled anyone.

Penn44

.


The logos on condoms are a more persuasive evidence than collective accounts for the Japanese.

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”