What are you pushing back on exactly? These problems are extremely minor compared to the rate of crime and poverty in American cities.

Treating half the population as undeserving of a career is "extremely minor"?

You mean forgetting the fact that America just literally banned abortion because the country is run by religious nutters, and has more mass shootings than any other country in the world, including the very nice statistic that the leading cause of death for children is America is from firearms. So yeah, I'll take whatever Japan has thanks very much.

> America just literally banned abortion

This is simply not true.

While shootings get a lot of attention, the probability of getting shot is approximately zero.

We literally had a mass shooting where 10 died and 10 were injured, today. And the number 1 cause of death in children is gun violence, for the last few years.

> We literally had a mass shooting where 10 died and 10 were injured, today.

And? Statistically, every day over a 100 people die in motor vehicle incidents and a further 100 from fall related injuries in America. You're just proving my point.

> number 1 cause of death in children is gun violence,

Firearm related deaths are not all gun violence. The overwhelming majority of them are accidents.

It’s not zero at all it’s higher than dying from a bike accident

Just looked it up: 0.3% lifetime probability of dying by gun assault. Mass shootings are indeed lower at 0.01%.

The religious nutters who banned abortion (edit: better put, eroded protections on it) are literally the same people who are trying to get everyone to focus on a severely overstated crime problem, as the grandparent comment did.

In fact you can point to Trump for both of these. On crime: He came in with his outdated world view shaped by 1980s New York complaining of "American carnage in our cities" at a time when crime was at a 25 year low. On abortion: Then he filled a few supreme court seats.

Except that America literally did not ban abortion.

Abortion is technically illegal in Japan.

How kind of you to take one of the most racist and sexist societies that’s politically identical to the religious nutters you’re talking about.

America did not ban abortion and it’s less restrictive than in Japan.

Also weird to call out shootings when a Japanese PM was assassinated with a gun less than a year ago.

Abe was assassinated with a homemade gun because manufactured ones are so hard to obtain. Per capita, the rate of gun death in the US is 1600x Japan's. Hell, the total annual number of gun deaths in Japan is lower than the US's rate of gun death per 100k (~10/year in Japan vs more than 10/100k/year in the US). The US is so much worse on that aspect that it's laughably absurd you'd even make that point.

https://everystat.org/ https://www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-how-japan-has-al...

And yet a longtime head of state got assassinated with a gun. No peaceful nation has political assassinations. The people are just as violent but with fewer resources to act on that violence. The sexual assault of women is one notable projection.

Abe's assassination was an anomaly. Japan is far more peaceful than America (I'm an American)--rather than pretending Japan more violent than the US, you might prefer the more accurate argument: Japan's low crime is attributable to its strong traditional values, homogeneity, conformity, etc.

Lol none of that is true. If you want to cherry-pick stuff, go with mass incarceration or something.

> America just literally banned abortion

Our supreme court overturned a law that enshrined country-wide access to abortion. I personally disagree with this, but the phrasing as stated here isn’t representative of the truth. Individuals in progressive states and those willing to cross state lines in many cases still retain access to abortion.

We didn't ban abortion, the Supreme Court said that states could make their own rules (more specifically, it says that there is no constitutional right to abortion, but state constitutions can change that).

(I'm not defending the US, just trying to correct a misconception.)

I am not convinced that finding "job opportunities and career growth severely limited by the heavily patriarchal culture" is the same as "treating half the population as undeserving of a career".

In what way are they different?

It seems like a different description of the same thing.

One is hyperbolic. One can believe that there is some bias against women without believing that they are treated as undeserving of having a career.

Ok, I read the description as quite literal not hyperbolic.

And you think they are the same? How much experience do you have with the Japanese job market?

I am not a female in the Japanese job market, but I do have first hand accounts from them.

Are you a woman in the Japanese job market?

I am not a woman in the Japanese job market. I am merely a man trying to understand how "job opportunities and career growth severely limited by the heavily patriarchal culture" is the same as "treating half the population as undeserving of a career". I see "job opportunities and career growth severely limited" for women in many industries in the United States and yet it would be silly to say that many think they are "undeserving of a career".

I am skeptical of some claims made about specific industries and cultures being much worse than others.

The word choice may be the same, but Japan is significantly more extreme than the US.

In 2018 21.8% of Medical doctors in Japan where women vs 36.6% in the US and 48.6% in the UK. https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/indicators/indicator-detai...

You can find more and less extreme examples in various industries, but there’s a real difference between the two counties.

Does this existence of fewer women in a job mean that they are kept out by those who think them “undeserving of a career”? Only 4% of sewage plant operators are female. Is that because they are kept out of the industry?

Deserving of a career here implies the career is desirable.

So, I understand if reality makes you uncomfortable but reality doesn’t care.

The reality of the situation has not caused me any discomfort.

I remain unconvinced that the two phrases are descriptions of the same thing.

Both phrases where used to describe the same situation. So they quite literally where describing the same thing.

The two phrases were used by two different commenters. I questioned that one was equal to the other. I still do.

Do you honestly think they aren’t both describing the job situation in Japan as it applies to women from the poster’s perspective?

Because I can only assume you’re playing pretend at this point.

I take offense at your assumption. I have sincerely written what I think. You have implied that you can read my mind and that I am "uncomfortable" or "playing pretend".

User SoylentOrange wrote that his wife "found her job opportunities and career growth severely limited by the heavily patriarchal culture." That seems a very believable assertion to me, given what I have read about Japanese culture and seen in many industries outside of tech in Western cultures.

User lozenge rephrased that as, "treating half the population as undeserving of a career".

I have no idea if lozenge has any experience with Japanese culture. I read his statement as a summary of what SoylentOrange wrote.

I remain unconvinced that the median Japanese man thinks that women are undeserving of a career. I welcome those with first hand experience to share more than anecdotes to convince me.

To be accused of "playing pretend" when questioning hyperbole makes me reconsider commenting on HN at all.

Sexism and racism is minor compared to crime and poverty? (Which Japan also has, you just don't see it)

Kinda yes? I’d rather be discriminated (to some degree) than shot dead.

Your chances of being shot outside of an inner city ghetto is so small as to be negligible. You've been brainwashed by sensationalist news. Meanwhile there are places in Japan that won't allow non-Japanese to enter.

Asian standard of crime rate is very different from the US...

I used to enjoy the night hanging out with friends or having fun alone in big Chinese cities (Beijing and Shanghai), hopping on public transportation, and having food in narrow streets. Without even the slightest worry of being robbed (but pickpockets do exist). Tokyo and other Japanese cities are supposed to be better.

But during my visit to Chicago and New Haven, I was strongly advised against going out alone (without a car) at night by my landlord.

You’re comparing Beijing and Tokyo to New Haven and Chicago.

Due respect, but your landlord was an idiot. It's dark at 4:30PM in Chicago in December. You think the city just shuts down?

Honest question: is it OK if I live near UChicago (visiting) and go out alone by foot at 9-10pm?

I have done for over 20 years. Hyde Park is one of the safer neighborhoods in Chicago.

You should, as in all places, be aware of your surroundings.

I'd say the chances of most people being shot inside an inner city ghetto are also small.

But I'm going to guess those complaining about the risk of being shot dead in an American city are unwilling to say the current interpretation of the 2nd amendment is a factor, or that we simply have too many guns.

The correlation between gun ownership and gun-related homicides (by state) is (weakly) negative.

We are happy to talk about the statistics, they just don't tell the story you want to tell.

You're saying that in states with a higher gun ownership rate, there are few (per capita, I hope you mean) gun related homicides. Specifically comparing US states, not the US to another country.

But 100% of gun related homicide happens with a gun. I had a funny read of your comment, perhaps you think those happen with "borrowed" guns ... If they only owned those guns outright, they could benefit from your statistic.

Sure if guns didn't exist, we wouldn't have gun violence. The question is: given that we have guns, what is the right form of regulation that would lead to better public safety overall? After all, there is meaningful evidence that guns are often used (even just presenting the gun, not actually firing it) for legitimate self-defense purposes.

I said nothing about borrowed guns. To my knowledge, most of those homicides are done with stolen handguns, and are used by people involved in organized crime in the most highly gun-restricted cities in the nation.

By the way, some googling on your claim found this as a first hit.

https://www.newswise.com/politics/gun-ownership-and-homicide...

"... [A] 1-per-cent increase in the rate of ownership is associated with a 1-per-cent increase in the rate of homicide by gun, which is three times higher than the previous studies had estimated,” Chalak explained.

There are lots of studies that come down on both sides of the issue. I'll have to check that one out, but experience suggests this one will have methodological issues.

> Your chances of being shot outside of an inner city ghetto is so small as to be negligible. You've been brainwashed by sensationalist news.

So have you. Just the word ghetto shows how disconnected you are from reality (sorry) - I haven't heard it in the city for decades. Your chance of getting shot anywhere is very tiny. People live and work, every day, for their entire lives in the highest-crime neighborhoods; almost all of them never get shot. They aren't idiots or monsters; they are normal people. If it was that dangerous, they would find a way to move. You could go there right now and you'd be fine. (And still, too many people are getting shot.)

That just shows what's important to you. Which is not necessarily what's important to others.

There's isn't necessarily more of either poverty or crime in USA cities than rural areas, it's roughly the same on average. (per capita; there are of course more people total in a city than a similarly sized rural area). Googling for cites, I find numbers all over the place.

I don't know how to compare problems between the USA and Japan, or decide what kinds of problems are "worse"... but our misperceptions of the size of various problems based on our "common sense" probably doesn't help.

I also lived for a time in Germany and in Canada. I want to note that West != USA.

These countries are not without their own problems but I see no need to paper over them. Rather, we can be honest about their faults and their positive qualities so we might learn to build a better society or inform others who may want to try living there.

Multi racial/cultural societies have a different set of problems and advantages. Why can't we be more like Japan is because you can't? It would be interesting to see what a modern multi racial/cultural society built under an Asian country would be like. Dubai? UAE? Not really the place for me.

Attributing problems to race is unfounded, a soft racism promoted by the far right (and unwittingly repeated).

This image of US cities is misleading.

American cities I've been in are dyanamic engines of the American economy, filled with culture and life. Crime is low (though shootings are up nationwide, in every kind of place, urban to rural). Poverty is a big problem all over the US.

The strongest evidence is the very high premium people will pay to live in these cities.

As a foreigner that got a rental apartment in Japan I would like to push back on the image that renting is difficult. I didn't have too much problems despite not being able to speak the language. I just looked up properties myself on Suumo (website to find listings) and arranged viewings, and managed to get my top pick. I would say that whatever problems there are in this area are just overshadowed by the fact that in many places in the US there isn't even enough housing.

My agent here in Japan told me not to bother with half the listings I showed him since they had racist/foreigner exclusion policies. That was of a few months ago.

It heavily varies on the price you’re willing to pay.

Cheapish appartments will have a ton of specific clauses, including no foreigners in general. Slightly overpriced ones will be more open, and you won’t have issues finding something above 160000 a month.

This is one of the reason why getting a meh paying job just to come to Japan is playing the immigration game in hard mode.

PS: for those shocked by “no foreigners” clauses, you’ll be interested to know that “girls only”, “no pets”, “no music instrument”, “no smoker” are also pretty common clauses, and you’ll also get refused depending on your employer if they don’t look good enough to the eyes of the owner. Lower tier appartments are a wild ride in general.

Can you exclude renters with children in Japan? Curious how far the delta goes between US protected classes wrt housing law and Japan.

At least part of the reason foreigners are excluded is because of flight risk. That being said low income, low rent places always give problems to renters even in America. In America you have to deal with credit checks, application fees that do the discriminating in a legal way. In Japan the average foreigner is actually renting with no credit check or income verification, and many forgo even attempting to learn the language which can make it hard to follow rules.

I really like living in Japan, but the first apartment we tried to get here we got denied because I'm a foreigner. Other than that I can't recall any instances of discrimination (been here ~12 years).

I would summarize your criticisms as Japan doesn't have Western values and priorities.

I can’t speak to this, but I can say that many of the Japanese-born students I taught expressed many of these same concerns to me. My female students felt discouraged that they would not be as successful as their male peers after graduating university. Many of my brighter students lamented the job culture and the lack of startup chances.

There's probably selection bias in your experience. They may have come here for school because they were among those that disliked their native culture the most. They may have picked up American values and priorities after arrival etc.

This was when I taught in Japan

Or maybe, instead of that, it is inaccurate to dismiss real problems with sexism and gender discrimination as "just cultural differences".

> There's probably selection bias in your experience.

Is there any argument at all that would convince you? A foreigner is unconvincing because he/she is a foreigner, and locals are unconvincing because of selection bias. So what would convince you?

I say this as a Japanophile myself, but a lot of male westerners experience have a very rose tinted glasses view of visiting the country.

People of Japanese descent, especially women, will give you a litany of reasons they left... most around the rigid work culture, sexism, bureaucracy, limited opportunities, etc.

When a white male westerner visits, the only discrimination we experience is generally in the form of positive discrimination. Talk to a female of southeast asian or mainland Chinese descent how they experience Japan and you'll get quite a different story.

GP says: > I had the privilege to live in Japan for one year, the real culture shock was coming back home to what we call normal.

I think that's really the crux of it - as a place to visit, or even live for a relatively short period of time (particularly if you're a man), it is vastly superior to most Western countries in a whole host of ways.

That is, of course, different than saying it's a place to make your life and career or that the country as a whole is moving in a positive direction. Spending a short time (even a year) in a place, particularly as an outsider, only lets you see the superficial parts of that place. Is it clean? Is it safe? Is the cost of living reasonable? Do people treat you well in day-to-day interactions? These are all important, but the answers can also all be great while the underlying political and social systems and outdated, patriarchal and oppressive to many.

Right, I spent a few years learning the language and really love the people/culture/food/etc. However, it was pretty clear pretty quickly that the only way I would ever want to work there was as an expat for a US company.

Some of the local customs carry over to the firms operating US offices. My friends wife, who had come over to US 10 years ago, told us some crazy stories about working for Japanese companies even in the US office, if it was all Japanese ex-pats.

For example, being given a written reprimand for not using the proper title for the level of boss she addressed in an email once. In English, it would be like if your bosses boss was John Smith, SVP and you failed to address him precisely as "SVP Smith" 100.0% of the time.

Or a reprimand / told to cover up because of the straps on her top not conforming to their office dress code. She was a woman who dressed very modestly, so it wasn't her, it was them. This was as recent as 4 years ago.

You may not realize it, but there’s a strong selection bias at work here. If you ask Japanese women living in foreign countries most of them will say they prefer it there. But if you ask Japanese women in Japan (i.e. the vast majority), most would never consider moving

Agreed this is true.

Asking citizens if they believe there are social problems so bad that they want to leave also has selection bias, and lots of it. I would hazard a guess that most people anywhere are not considering leaving, are not prepared to, and can't fairly speak to the merits of one place vs another, for lots of reasons such as national pride, friends and family, and language and cultural familiarity.

I don't see your comment as push back to OP's comment, because you are both right. On the one hand Japan is very safe, low poverty levels, etc like OP said. On the other hand there are all the issues you described.

From what I gather reading this and previous articles on HN is Japan is either great or terrible depending on what you want to do. If you want to explore another culture, and really experience something different than the west than Japan is probably the best place you can go for that experience. On the other hand if you're trying to start a company, move up the corporate ladder, etc, then the US is going to be a much better place for you than Japan.

> - like the author mentioned, students in Japan (I taught at a university) were less worldly and less knowledgeable about things going on outside Japan, extending into even their direct professional activities

While university may be different, there is a non-small portion of the US that knows little outside their own community/state/maybe country.

There is one exception to the foreigner comment though. Blonde / white foreigners usually have an advantage, even over native Japanese people since the Eurocentric beauty standard is much in play there. You can see evidence of this in their modeling industry where high paying modeling gigs go to those who are Caucasian or half Caucasian.

Source: Interview with a model in Japan (https://youtu.be/VEubSC2CidA?t=157)

That’s true in certain industries like modeling, but not others, even if you’re a white native Japanese. Often, these types struggle to ever be fully accepted into society. They’re seen as outsiders and, at best, seen as “cool” in an exotic way.

Is it Japan's duty to sacrifice its standard of living and culture to make it more comfortable for you, or should they be seeking out the best life for their own people first?

The best life for whom exactly? If Japanese youth leave and don’t want to live in rural communities, if they don’t want to raise families, if their leading cause of death is suicide, then the country does not ‘seek out the best life for them’.

1) Whether you're White or not, and whether the destination is filled with People of Color or not, isn't it a little entitled for anybody to go to another country and agitate against cultural standards that don't align perfectly with yours?

2) Regardless of whether you or Japanese know what's in their own best interest, can you please answer my general question. Is it Japan's duty to try and make life better for themselves first, or for you first? Can we acknowledge that it's any country's first duty to try and seek out the best possible lives for their own people first?

I believe the entitlement is held by those who determine and control what their society should be, when their next generation are voting with their actions that they don’t want it.

It’s entitled to say those people are ‘Japan’ and the other people there, who want change are not.

1) Doesn't Japan have some kind of democratic system where they can cast their vote and make their choices about the direction of their society in a more concrete form than your arbitrary assumption about meaning of the next generation's actions?

2) The reasons for anything large on a societal level usually have more than one nuanced answer, but I'd like to try and figure out your meaning here. What significant evidence exists that certain things you listed such as Japanese youth not wanting to live in rural areas or youth not making as many babies as previous generations has anything to do with their treatment of foreigners? I don't really see a direct and obvious connection, and in fact these trends seem fairly common in Western youth (with a radically different inclusive culture) as well.

The evidence for dissatisfaction is in the article and in suicide stats found online. The issue I’m raising is that this indicates their democracy does not represent the needs of all its people.

I would argue, this is why their economy has stalled relatively, since the 90s.

Well, the same kind of cultural effects among the young exist in the Western world (the youth want to live in cities, not reproducing as much, problems with suicides, etc) and these are countries that are open and welcoming to foreigners and try and respect everybody of every race/gender/etc.

Therefore, I'm not seeing a strong case for Japan's problems being caused by them not being welcoming to foreigners because other countries are welcoming to foreigners and still have these problems in greater number today.

The suicide rate in the US is significantly higher. Japan's isn't that high compared to other peer nations.

In my experience, the discrimination against foreigners regarding housing is much deserved. I've rented out my condo in Japan to Japanese people for years, and my tenants have, without exception, kept the place clean and in excellent condition. All I have to do between tenants is clean a little. Other than that, my condo still looks the same as it always has. Contrast that with my rental property in the US, which most renters turn into a shit hole that has to be renovated between tenants. I always give deposits back in Japan. I rarely can in the US.

Also, I went into an apartment that had been rented by college-aged Americans in Chiba, Japan once. There were hundreds of cockroaches smashed into the carpet, one room was completely covered in black mold, the shoji doors had holes punched through them. It was embarrassing. This wasn't the only time I've seen this either.

In my opinion, the best way to overcome housing discrimination in Japan would be for foreigners to have some pride and treat other people's property with respect.