Animal welfare in Japan.

[alyacroft]

(#"!&%(!"#&%("#!%&!"#
Why couldn't I have been told this sooner!?!?
Seriously though, I haven't completely lost my cool, but if I knew that I would have worked even harder to keep my frustration under control and hidden. Good lesson, even if it is 3/4 through my time here.

Are you joking? Nobody told you this?! It should be in large red letters on the front of the official copy of hitchhiker's guide to Japan, "Don't lose your cool!".

[phoenixphreak]

(#"!&%(!"#&%("#!%&!"#
Why couldn't I have been told this sooner!?!?
Seriously though, I haven't completely lost my cool, but if I knew that I would have worked even harder to keep my frustration under control and hidden. Good lesson, even if it is 3/4 through my time here.

Are you joking? Nobody told you this?! It should be in large red letters on the front of the official copy of hitchhiker's guide to Japan, "Don't lose your cool!".

I'm not saying I went around making big problems. But accurately, I did not know the whole part of 'losing' by being the first to show emotion. [sarcasmfontstart]Sorry we aren't all blessed to know everything about the world out of the womb. Also, I never received a copy of the Hitchhiker's Guide to Japan...[sarcasmfontend]

[word]

So if you walked up on someone drowning a bag full of puppies in the river, you wouldn't get a little angry? You think it's unacceptable to let a bit of anger show in a situation like that?

Is it acceptable? No. Why? Because it doesn't help the puppies. Eyes on the prize, help the animals first then be upset/angry/etc. later. Offer to buy the puppies, don't swear or yell or whatever.

You are really bad about assuming the worst of people. The world must look like a pretty twisted, f-ed up place to you.

And seriously if your reactions on this forum are anything to judge by you should stay well away from "helping" any animals.

As I've often noted, "word" is a persona that I use on the internet. I am quite aware of my audience in a given social situation. When I'm [my IRL self], talking, in person, with a conservative Japanese person, I speak and behave in a certain way. I won't change who I am; I won't lie; I won't falsely represent myself... but I won't behave in a manner that is counterproductive to my goals. When I'm talking to a pretentious douchebag on an internet forum, I speak and behave in a different way.

If the cops are called the police are far more likely to arrest you than they are to worry about a minor issue like that some dog's habitat is, in the opinion of the aforementioned trespassing foreigner who's frothing at the mouth and yelling, a bit small.

Again, assuming the worst. You should really examine the root of this behavior. What happened to you that you tend to see the world in such a manner?

You keep saying that you should educate, and at the same time keep talking about how it's okay to show your emotions. You're mistaken.

...minor displays of emotion, like frowning, looking mildly disapproving, looking concerned, smiling, even a small chuckle, are okay...

Nice contradictory posts. See, you took what I said, assumed that I would be incapable of dealing with animal abuse in any manner other than "HULK SMASH," and proceeded to berate me for it. You, sir, need to check your assumptions. I have lived in Japan for almost three years now. I think I know how to appropriately show emotion according to Japanese social standards. Why did you assume that I would use Western social conventions in Japan? I used the phrase "show a bit of anger," which you wildly misinterpreted and assumed meant that I would "yell or swear" at the party in question? Why would you assume this?

Could it be because you are a pretentious arsehat who desperately needs to feel superior to everyone, imparting your glorious wisdom on the grateful n00bs who depend upon your fabulous advice?

This is why you have senpai on these forums phoenixphreak. I wasn't born knowing these things, I learnt them the hard way. I also do have a leg up on most JETs since I grew up interacting with Asians on a daily basis, and the "don't show excessive emotion" rule is pretty much the same in most Asian cultures.

Ah, it seems I was right. As a pretentious douchebag, myself, I am certainly qualified to identify other folks who're even worse than me!

[word]

don't give up a good fight, either. This is one worth fighting, imho.
...
but I also think it's okay to express your emotions in reaction to a situation that is completely unacceptable.
...
So if you walked up on someone drowning a bag full of puppies in the river, you wouldn't get a little angry?

Face it Word. Your posts speak for themselves. You adopted an aggressive tone from the start, then you talk about "express your emotions", and then you talk about getting angry.

Because I used the word "fight"? One "fights" cancer. One "fights" for gender equality. One "fights" for the environment. One "fights" to stay awake. One "fights" temptation. "Fight" doesn't always inherently mean one resorts to violence, and it is pathetically disingenuous for you to imply such a thing. That's unsurprising, though, you're a pretty pathetically disingenuous person on these forums.

I'm not misinterpreting your posts.

As I once said to someone else, just because you say something is true doesn't make it true. You are misinterpreting my posts, and wildly misrepresenting my position. When I try to further clarify it, you simply deny my true position and attack a straw man.

I'm reading exactly what you've written and what you've written is advocating an aggressive, culturally high-handed (Your first post called Japan "behind the times")

LOL! Again, I was the first poster in this thread to give a sympathetic nod to cultural differences! How hilariously ignorant of you to accuse me of "cultural high-handed" behavior! How shall anyone ever comment on social behaviors without comparison to one's own culture--particularly when a culture appears to be moving in a similar direction to one's own historical evolution? You also took my statement completely out of context (as you often do). If I were comparing a different aspect of culture, I might have said that Western culture is behind the times in comparison to Japan (say, gun control).

...your "net" personality and "real life" personalities will be fundamentally similar...

Yeah, see the following:

I won't change who I am; I won't lie; I won't falsely represent myself... but I won't behave in a manner that is counterproductive to my goals. When I'm talking to a pretentious douchebag on an internet forum, I speak and behave in a different way.

Your reading comprehension is laughingly pathetic.

...I am not out of line for assuming that you'll display a similar inability to reason logically, and a similar level of insensitivity and rudeness in real life.

Please point to a specific flaw in my logic. I said it was acceptable to express emotion when encountering abuse, you assumed that I meant expressing emotion according to Western standards (even though I didn't say this and actually implied the opposite). You then said it was acceptable to express emotion according to Japanese standards, which contradicted your previous position. The error was yours, not mine. You made a faulty assumption and you completely changed your position. Nothing wrong with that; it happens. I've done it plenty of times. Not being willing to acknowledge the fact that you did these things is pretty stupid, though, in my opinion.

Also, if I met someone as ignorant, pretentious, and obnoxious as you IRL, I would certainly say all of these things to you.

Actually, no, I probably wouldn't, because people as ignorant, pretentious, and obnoxious as you are usually not the sort of folks with whom I spend time.


It may be that you don't mind the overall treatment of animals by cultures that haven't yet adopted social conventions toward the treatment of animals that some other nations have adopted. That's okay. Maybe there are very few issues for which you will take a position and speak. Maybe you are okay with the suffering of those who cannot speak for themselves. Maybe you will walk by in silence. That's okay. God knows you don't have to answer to me. Maybe it's just not something that you feel is worth fighting for. There have been lots of times in the history of humanity that people ignored the suffering of others. Nobody is requiring you to speak up for an abused animal. It's just a choice you get to make, and you've made your choice pretty clear.

In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.

To be nobody but yourself in a world that's doing its best to make you somebody else, is to fight the hardest battle you are ever going to fight. Never stop fighting.

Fighting for something better than just jungle law, fighting so's he can stand on his own two feet, free and decent, like he was created, no matter what his race, color, or creed.... There's no place out there for graft, or greed, or lies, or compromise with human liberties.... Great principles don't get lost once they come to light. They're right here; you just have to see them again!

It may be that you disagree with these men and the sentiments they are trying to express. Perhaps you think they're being "aggressive" and that their opinions should be dismissed. And that's okay. If that's the sort of person you want to be... you don't have to justify yourself to me. You're the only person who can really decide what sort of of person you wanna be, and you're the only person to whom you'll ever truly answer. Screw me and my opinion of you!

[OdysseyOfNoises]

Since when is legitimate and justifiable criticism regarding Japan considered 'Japan-bashing'?

[word]

Since when is legitimate and justifiable criticism regarding Japan considered 'Japan-bashing'?

word

Oh, wait, you haven't made a single positive suggestion.

I guess you missed these:

I do think that showing our passion for our four-legged friends can be an important part of our job. We can do this in all sorts of ways; I did a couple of classes in my eikaiwa about animal welfare in the US, how all my pets were adopted/rescued, about the horrors of puppy/kitten mills, the importance of spaying/neutering, etc. It's part of the reason why we're here. So, I dunno what I'm trying to say; I guess, be realistic in your abilities, don't set unattainable goals, but don't give up a good fight, either. This is one worth fighting, imho.

I advocated teaching people, discussed my efforts to do so [...] I think seeking to educate, inform, and learn are valiant goals for us all, but I also think it's okay to express your emotions in reaction to a situation that is completely unacceptable.

...animal abuse is against the law in Japan, and as such, violations may (and should (no, MUST)) be reported to officers of the law when witnessed.

I am advocating nothing but education and understanding.

Again, your reading comprehension leaves a bit to be desired.

I'm the only person here who's made any positive practical suggestions on what can be done to improve these animals' lives and how to approach the target audience.

I'm actually quite concerned with one of your "positive suggestions," to be honest:

So if you walked up on someone drowning a bag full of puppies in the river...

Offer to buy the puppies...

You are saying that a person drowning a bag full of puppies in a river should be financially rewarded. In what universe is that a "positive suggestion"?

Do you know why I used that particular example? It was because that was the story the previously-mentioned dude from the dog-breeding family told. They took their unwanted/unsellable puppies, put them in a bag, and drowned them in a lake behind their house, then threw the bodies away. They ran a puppy mill, and this was the method they used to "dispose" of "unwanted" puppies. Of course, if they could sell these dogs, they wouldn't have drowned them... but people who financially reward these monsters for such behavior only encourage similar behavior in the future.

I'm prepared to share what I know and try to help.

You are openly spreading misinformation; some of the things that you've said here are 100% WRONG. What's worse, you actually implied that one should not call the police if one witnessed a crime taking place! Perhaps you only meant to say this in the narrow confines of this discussion; perhaps a crime against an animal is not something you consider worth reporting. Would you call the police if you saw a woman being sexually assaulted? If you saw a man being robbed? If you saw a person committing arson? What makes one crime worth reporting, and another not worth reporting? Is it only where human beings are involved?

In case you forgot what you said, here's a refresher:

If the cops are called the police are far more likely to arrest you...

So if you witness a crime, you should not call the police because the police are "far more likely to arrest you"? That's what you said. I linked to the applicable laws in question (even qualified them with an example), explained that if those laws were being violated, one had a responsibility to report the violation, and that's how you responded.

You have done very little here but misrepresent the statements of others, attack ridiculous straw men, encourage questionable (if not illegal) behavior, contradict yourself, and spread misinformation and outright lies. Good show, man. Keep it up.

[word]

These examples are all irrelevant to the OP's question.

Well, not in the big picture; I'm interested in changing Japanese society for (what I perceive to be) the better in the long run. As I acknowledged in my original post, there's relatively little that the OP can do in this unfortunate situation.

Option 3 was my option. It the highest chance of complete success.

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree here, and let the readers decide who is offering the superior solution, the person who would offer money to someone drowning puppies, or the person who wouldn't.

But clearly you have a better option Word, and I'd love to hear it...

I would express (according to Japanese standards) my displeasure with the person's actions, explain that I believed what they were doing was illegal according to my understanding of Japanese law, and encourage them to give me the puppies so that I could attempt to coordinate with a Japan-based adoption agency in order to find homes for the puppies. I would strongly encourage them never to do such a horrific thing in the future.

I'm sure you'll find something wrong with that solution, and if you don't, you'll simply assume that I would "yell and swear" at the individual in question and attack me for that, because that's pretty much all you've done throughout this argument--assume ridiculous things, then attack me for them.

...because clearly you think you're so much wiser than everyone else.

I don't. I think I'm a decent person, I think I have a good, defensible set of principles, and I think you're a pretentious jerk. Wise? Meh. I learn things every day; I've got a long, long way to go before I'll ever think of myself as "wise."

Nice quoting word, except you forget that the context is the OP's question, that of a depressed dog in a cage that was, in his opinion, too small. If you called the police there is ZERO likelihood of them arresting the owner, absolutely ZERO! They're broken no Japanese law at all (I read the article you linked, it deals with injury, killing, witholding food/water sufficient to cause injury and abandonment - NOT cage size or regular walks). However, there is a small possibility that the owner of the animal might press charges for trespassing, harassment, or that the police might arrest you for misuse of the emergency number or wasting police time. I was entirely accurate when I wrote that the police are far more likely to arrest you.

Actually, if you'll read my response again (a bit more carefully this time around), you'll notice that the context was NOT the OP's question, but your claim that the owner was "within their rights ... to take their anger out on the animal." I'm not entirely sure what you meant by that, but Japanese law makes it clear that "no person shall . . . inflict cruelty to animals without due course," and I don't believe being angry about an gaijin's complaint qualifies as "due course." It's possible that a Japanese person, police office, or court might disagree. I guess you disagree. I also made it clear that "these laws have been poorly enforced, historically, and punishments for violations are generally not applied except in the most extreme of situations, and sometimes justice fails even in those situations, but animal abuse is against the law in Japan, and as such, violations may (and should (no, MUST)) be reported to officers of the law when witnessed." I linked the actual law just prior to that statement, so that the OP could learn more about what truly constituted "animal abuse" according to Japanese legal definitions.

... so I'm 100% correct, not 100% wrong.

Even if I grant you that you misunderstood the context within which I intended that response, I think it's pretty ridiculous to claim that one runs the risk of being arrested for attempting to report perceived animal abuse. Please cite a verifiable example of a time when such a thing has happened in the past.

You have done very little here but misrepresent the statements of others, attack ridiculous straw men, encourage questionable (if not illegal) behavior, contradict yourself, and spread misinformation and outright lies. Good show, man. Keep it up.

Except that the above more accurately applies to you word. Frankly I'm done with dealing with you. On this thread you've spead misinformation that could have got the OP and other JETs into serious legal trouble (you stated that it would be okay to call the police in this situation).. all for the sake of "winning" an argument on a forum? You're a menace word, and you deserve to be banned from these forums.[/quote][/quote]

I called you out on your malarkey, called you out on your self-contradiction (something you've still failed to acknowledge), called you out on your assumptions and straw man fallacies, called you out on your blatant lies to people on these forums, and I could be banned?

For what it's worth, I don't think you should be banned; you're an intelligent dude and you have the best of intentions; you often post a lot of really good advice here, but I want you to be able to see what you're doing in this particular thread. Let's forget about your self-contradictions and that other nonsense; you encouraged people not to report crimes. I could not have made it easier for anyone to understand what I was trying to do when I posted those links to applicable Japanese laws. I linked to an entry concerning the laws, linked to an example, and qualified my links with an acknowledgement that these laws are sometimes not enforced well. It's up to the OP and the other readers to decide what they should do with that information. I wanted them to understand their rights and responsibilities in any given situation. I believe in participants of the JET program; they're not all the greatest people ever to walk the face of this planet, but I think, on average, they're a bright, well-meaning, sincere, compassionate group of people, and I am faithful that they, when well-informed, will make the right decision. You, sir, are not informing them well, in my opinion, and I have stated as much here.

You know what? For my personal insults, I am truly sorry. I realize that I have done nothing but weaken my position by calling you a "pretentious arsehat" and the like. You and I are alike in a great many ways, and a proclivity toward obnoxious condescension is a characteristic we both share, unfortunately. I think you have chosen a very, very weak position in this particular argument, and have inadvertently argued for questionable behavior for which, under normal circumstances, you would never intentionally encourage. I'm not sure why you jumped on my statements in the beginning; everyone else seemed to understand my intentions. I understand that I probably made things a lot worse with my response, but I think you're being wildly disingenuous in your interpretation of my statements and advice in this thread, and I think you know better. Let's both try to do better, shall we?

[word]

...you have no ideas...

Let's just leave it up to the OP and the readers to decide whether or not I offered any ideas in this thread, shall we?

Logically it is highly unlikely that they'll simply hand you over a bag of half-drowned puppies covered in their fingerprints and clearly identifiable as their property when you've made it clear that you're invoking the law. Your scenario might work, but it's pretty much all stick and no carrot, as opposed to my scenario which seems (on the surface) to be all carrot, with the stick kept thoroughly out of sight until the puppies are safe.

"Stick kept thoroughly out of sight until the puppies are safe"? Are you saying you WOULD contact the police once you had the puppies in hand?

At the moment I'd say you're hopelessly naive.

Meh. If naivety means taking a firm stand against animal abusers, I'll accept the description.

You characterise the dog killer as a materialistic monster, then expect them to cave to threat of legal action and a heartfelt appeal to give up the puppies for adoption? If he's a materialist then you use his own weakness, money, to find the cleanest solution with the greatest chance of success.

That's a pretty big "if" you've set up there. Why wouldn't the reverse argument be just as likely--"IF" he's a self-interested sort of dude, he might respond to the thread of legal action? Seems to me that "if" works both ways. Your assumption is that most Japanese people are materialistic? I mean, is that the logic that you're using to justify this response? He's probably a materialist because he's... ?

Can you even read English? I wrote,
"They're entirely within their rights to tell you to get the hell off their property and then take their anger out on the animal"

Yeah, I'm actually employed as an English teacher. I broke this down for you earlier:

"They're entirely within their rights to tell you to get the hell off their property": Absolutely, 100% true. (To be perfectly honest, I was kinda baffled by this in the first place. Why is the OP trespassing?)
"They're entirely within their rights to take out their anger on the animal": Absolutely, 100% false according to Japanese law.

This means they're within their rights to tell you to get the hell off their property. And then they might take their anger out on the animal when you're off their property and out of sight. They might do this out of a legitimate desire to avoid a future confrontation, but transferring the animal to an even worse position at the rear of the house (where it can't be seen), or they might give the animal a kick (which wouldn't necessarily cause an "injury" sufficient for the police to take any action since it'll be your word against the owner's and the owner will bring up other issues like your trespassing and aggressive action). Either way there's no way the police will do anything against the owner.

Yeah, I agree, which is why I warned the OP that "admittedly, these laws have been poorly enforced, historically, and punishments for violations are generally not applied except in the most extreme of situations, and sometimes justice fails even in those situations." However, the failure of law enforcement officials to enforce a law does not make violation of said law any less illegal. You were 100% wrong in the statement "They're entirely within their rights ... to take out their anger on the animal." If I am caught speeding, and the officer decides to let me off with a warning, I still broke the law. If you beat up some poor guy, and the cops decide there's no proof and let you go, you still broke the law.

Greenpeace activists arrested for protesting whaling in Japan. http://www.wspa-international.org/wspaswork/whaling/greenpeace_arrests.aspx

The two activists are being investigated for allegedly stealing a box of whale meat...

Dolphin activist arrested for filming in Taiji. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/05/local/la-me-gs-sea-shepherd-activist-arrested-filming-cove-dolphin-20120104

Erwin was not arrested until a young male trainer from the Dolphin Resort Hotel stated to police that Erwin had pushed past him at the barricade.

Hell, it even happens in the U.S. http://www.salemnews.com/local/x1899099763/Animal-activist-arrested-for-trying-to-protect-dog

...she initially defied a police sergeant's repeated orders to release the leash...

You didn't produce what I requested. In each of those instances, the accused was arrested because of an alleged violation of the law, not because of an attempt to report a crime. I would never encourage someone to violate Japanese law in an attempt to right some perceived wrong. There are legal means of pursuing effective solutions to problems, and I believe we, as ALTs and representatives of our home nations, have a particularly pressing responsibility to respect and uphold the laws of our host nation. That said, we should also be responsible enough to report clear and egregious violations of said laws. Surely you don't disagree... do you?

... there, point proven. WIll you apologise now? I think not.

You completely failed to prove your point. I will always apologize if and when an apology is warranted (see previous post).

I clarified the degree of emotion allowed in Japan, which you characterised as self-contradiction. I don't see it that way. I was quite clear from the start that strong displays of emotion weren't socially appropriate in Japan, and I was just clarifying how much emotion could be displayed when someone followed up that this was news to them. That's the only time, as far as I'm aware, that I've contradicted myself in this thread.

Then you acknowledge it was a self-contradiction? That's great. I'm curious as to why you grant yourself the right to clarify your statements but don't grant others the same right. Do you acknowledge that I made it clear that one must express emotions according to Japanese standards, and that by your own admission, such expressions are acceptable?

I was mainly concerned about the underlying note of Japan bashing and what I perceived was a very aggressive rhetoric being used that, given the current sensitive animal rights situation in Japan, might be counter-productive.

I think that your perceptions of others are unfortunately warped.

All I'm saying is that people need to approach this issue very, very softly if you want to get the best possible result, and stay employed...

Hmm, that sounds an awful lot like what I said in my first post:

...we are rather limited in what we can do, and I think it's fair to acknowledge that, but I do think that showing our passion for our four-legged friends can be an important part of our job. We can do this in all sorts of ways... It's part of the reason why we're here. ...be realistic in your abilities, don't set unattainable goals, but don't give up a good fight, either.

[word]

"Stick kept thoroughly out of sight until the puppies are safe"? Are you saying you WOULD contact the police once you had the puppies in hand?

I'd probably contact one of the animal welfare organisations first and try and work through them, because my apartment doesn't allow dogs. It would also be beneficial to have a Japanese "front man", so I'd offer testimony to initiate the investigation, but the main action would be seen to be taking place between a Japanese organisation (animal welfare org.) and a Japanese person (the breeder). It would be the neatest solution, and again the most likely to produce a successful long-term scenario. As a foreigner who's unfamiliar with the Japanese legal system I'd doubtless make an error if I tried to pursue this on my own, and the breeder might even be in a position to protect himself from further investigation by claiming harassment.

A nice idea; why didn't you say that in the first place? Interesting that you mention that, though, given that you never actually posted a link to an animal welfare organization (unlike me and one other poster).

Edit: I would still, under no circumstances whatsoever, offer money to someone who was drowning puppies.

You miss my point. You may take a "firm stand", but you'll be ultimately unsuccessful because you haven't considered the wider social and political environment in which you claim you want to make changes.

Amazing that you'll say these things without taking into account the things that I've already posted here:

I'm well known in my village and schools as an animal person; I've brought my pets to school on several occasions and talk about my pets back home a lot. ... I do think that showing our passion for our four-legged friends can be an important part of our job. We can do this in all sorts of ways; I did a couple of classes in my eikaiwa about animal welfare in the US, how all my pets were adopted/rescued, about the horrors of puppy/kitten mills, the importance of spaying/neutering, etc. It's part of the reason why we're here.

I completely agree that these conditions are the result of widespread ignorance and lack of empathy towards animals, which is why I advocated teaching people, discussed my efforts to do so.

I think seeking to educate, inform, and learn are valiant goals for us all...

...in the big picture; I'm interested in changing Japanese society for (what I perceive to be) the better in the long run.

Can you even read English? I wrote,
"They're entirely within their rights to tell you to get the hell off their property and then take their anger out on the animal"

Yeah, I'm actually employed as an English teacher. I broke this down for you earlier:

"They're entirely within their rights to tell you to get the hell off their property": Absolutely, 100% true. (To be perfectly honest, I was kinda baffled by this in the first place. Why is the OP trespassing?)
"They're entirely within their rights to take out their anger on the animal": Absolutely, 100% false according to Japanese law.

... so in other words you re-wrote what I wrote make it untrue, then pointed out that it was untrue the way you had written it? ... that's just silly...

You are (or were) employed as an English teacher, aren't (weren't) you? I am assuming you understand the proper usage of the word "and" in your own sentence.

"They're entirely within their rights to tell you to get the hell off their property and then take their anger out on the animal" is what you wrote. According to most accepted interpretations of English grammar, that means "they're entirely within their rights to tell you to get the hell off their property AND they're entirely within their rights to to then take their anger out on the animal." If that's not what you meant, then you really need to correct your sentence, sir.

Do you expect the charge sheet to read, "Foreigner arrested for trespassing while attempting to help restrained animal"? No, the charge sheet will read, "Foreigner arrested for trespassing". The same way the Greenpeace activists were arrested for theft (even though they claim it wasn't), or the dolphin slaughter reporter would maintain he was just walking and bumped into someone (not assault in his opinion). The commonality between these cases is that the person attempting to report on animal abuse was arrested, not the person engaging in animal abuse. Charges are drummed up against people engaging in these sort of activities, so it is critical to be super-careful. Your contention that the animal abuser would be arrested... well, the evidence suggests otherwise.

Surely you're not suggesting that Japanese law enforcement officials are corrupt, are you? And you were accusing others of "Japan-bashing"? I don't know about you, but I have faith that law enforcement officials in this nation will execute their job properly and with professional courtesy, regardless of the race, ethnicity, or nationality of the person reporting the crime. If I am misbehaving in some fashion, I would certainly expect them to respond accordingly, but if I am obeying the law and observing my responsibility as a representative of my country to report violations of my host country's laws, then I certainly believe they will respond appropriately.

I guess you don't. Your point remains unproven.

Except that you then proceeded with quite aggressive rhetoric and name-calling. That hardly paints the picture of someone mature and self-posessed enough to keep their emotions in check while dealing with an emotive animal abuse situation.

You assume a great deal, sir. You are mistaken in your assumptions, as usual.

... except in no way is this "an important part of our job".

I disagree, but I acknowledge the legitimacy of your opinion on this matter. This is a matter of opinion, and your opinion differs from mine.

It's not in your contract that you're here to change Japanese culture, and there's no special clause about animal rights. There is, however, a specific clause about not doing anything to bring the JET programme into disrepute and that this is grounds for dismissal.

Yeah, as I said:

I would never encourage someone to violate Japanese law in an attempt to right some perceived wrong. There are legal means of pursuing effective solutions to problems, and I believe we, as ALTs and representatives of our home nations, have a particularly pressing responsibility to respect and uphold the laws of our host nation. That said, we should also be responsible enough to report clear and egregious violations of said laws. Surely you don't disagree... do you?

You didn't answer my question. Surely you don't disagree... do you?

[Staticnz]

When you completely omit any discussion or mention of the mitigating factors and engage in gross over-generalisations. The OP's question was regarding an animal in a small cage that wasn't played with. This thread descended into comments like, "japanese people see pets as a great novelty but actually have very, very little regard for the lives of animals", "most dogs inside in Japan are kept in cages", etc. There's no basis in fact for these gross generalisations, and most animals in my area are kept outside on leads, and their owners take them for daily walks. Your individual experience may be different, but you're generalising that experience to EVERY Japanese person EVERYWHERE in Japan. That's racist b/s and people deserve to be called on it.

I don't want to get into the general warfare of this thread, as I think this is yet another issue where if there is something the individual can't do too much about, which is challenge the overall attitudes of a culture, something very large and often said to be unquestionable...well you are a bit screwed.

...but accusing me of racism? Really? You know I have my own culture and my own country to compare Japan with, in the attitudes. In New Zealand there are plenty of cases of animal abuse, and there are plenty of abandoned animals...but at the same time we have a large organization in the SPCA, various animal shelters, all kinds of places where you can leave your animals to be cared for, and I have NEVER seen animals kept in the kinds of cages you see in Japan in New Zealand. They don't keep dogs in such small areas...and I'm talking mainstream pet stores, not puppy mills.

In New Zealand dogs are treated generally as outside animals. There are all kinds of big dogs that people take for walks and become really integrated into the family. From what I've seen in Japan, there is a real subculture for smaller dogs, because I guess they are more similar to having a cat, so they dress them up in clothes. I think there is a widespread fetishization of animals in Japan. You see it in everything from people dressing as animals, to the clothes they dress their animals in, to the animals crammed into tiny cages in pet stores. Every pet store I've seen in Japan has animals crammed into cages. Big dogs in tiny cages like a few meters in size.

And don't get me started on the zoos. In Hokkaido they have to keep exotic animals like tigers and lions in these tiny indoor enclosures because Hokkaido winter is too brutal for them to be inside. The animals literally GO INSANE. They walk in circles, and the lions growl and pad and pad like they're mental.

It's just funny...like, you can make generalizations about a culture that are racist, if they have to do with the intrinsic nature of some race or another. That is always 100% wrong. But if you comment on the culture in terms of the mainstream attitudes to things...to everything from say whaling, to, I dunno, war attitudes, to other animals, or sex, or inequality, or attitudes between various races...etc...you cry racism? Now that I don't buy. There is a context to racism that is missing in what I said because I'm basing what I'm saying on experiences I've had in this country.

Like when you saw the, I dunno, pick a random example...civil rights fight in the United States, and saw all the things that were happening in the context of that time, did you say...oh black people are being racist for question the attitudes of mainstream America? No, there was a problem. Criticizing an attitude, or the way society does something, no matter what race or culture, is totally legitimate. For example the way women are treated in Muslim countries. I'm not for it. I don't like it. But as a foreigner of course it's like if I say something about it I'm some kind of awful guy.

To me it comes down to an ability to put an attitude into a cultural or historical context. For example, during war time Japan...did I think your average Japanese person was some kind of cartoonish monster? Even people committing war crimes? No, they were part of a prevailing attitude fostered by a societal context and environment.

I think there are still all kinds of prevailing mainstream attitudes in Japan, and other countries, indeed around the world (it isn't like China is good on animal rights, in fact they could be one of the worst in the world) , that are extremely subtle in how they play out from day to day, thus are hard to question, and are often tied to culture in a way that insulates them from criticism, whereas they stem more from a long term lack of care or activity in a certain area, therefore the creation of various assumptions that lead to not really caring much for the welfare of animals. This is why some societies are remarkably conservative and strict, and others are generally relatively liberal. There is a trajectory to attitudes throughout history...related to everything from religion, to institutions and politics, to the engagement/freedom of the population, traditional attitudes, popular culture, etc.

[Staticnz]

And btw, there is a huge problem in New Zealand of people idealizing cats...this leads to a HUGE number of abandoned cats. I hated that about New Zealand and I criticized it, and have always thought people that idealize cats are idiots. They get a cat, think it is great for a couple weeks, then totally lose interest and end up giving the cat to a shelter...and the shelters are pushed to capacity, full of pets douchebags were too lazy to look after.

It has absolutely nothing to do with race. The difference between New Zealand and Japan is that in New Zealand there is an infrastructure to deal with it, and at least a wide spread attitude of the people that aren't doing the abusing giving a crap about it. Also, we definitely treat dogs better in New Zealand...we treat them as the free ranging outside animals they are, generally speaking.

Y'know I'm sure most Japanese people would care about such things to do with animals on an individual basis, reacting as human beings that care about suffering. But what I'm saying is I think the mainstream culture is aggressively silent on this issue, resulting in it really not coming up much in Japanese society, resulting in a lot of animal suffering no one pays any attention to. A sort of blind spot.

But of course abuse exists in New Zealand. It's a question of a social attitude, in my opinion. I've simply not seen much mainstream caring for animals in Japan. Never saw it. Where is it!?!? They don't even have TV shows about animals like they do in New Zealand (We have a lot of 'pet rescue' shows where people go around saving animals from abusive owners and such).

[Staticnz]

Also in Tokyo I saw a guy with a big trolley full of ragged and diseased looking cats in small crates. I guess he was selling them or something.

I could say with absolute certitude that would be intolerable in New Zealand. He'd be off the street quicker than you could say hello. Heck, they'd probably put him in jail.

I only say this in that they are both developed countries. Therefore it isn't that it is out of Japan's hands to do something, it is that the attitudes to pets allows it.

I guess the equation changes even more when you put a country that is TRULY brutal to animals into it, like China. But everyone knows China is still developing in many many areas, and poverty is a real driver of a lot of negative behavior. Japan really doesn't have that excuse anymore.

[Antonath]

I'd try and calm this thread down by posting pictures of cute bunnies, but I think, given the nature of the argument, it would have the opposite effect. So instead, I offer a different form of calming.

[Staticnz]

In the short time I've been posting on these forums I've yet to see any contentious discussion not degenerate into warfare...but it's kind of refreshing actually. Folks are passionate about stuff...that's nice!

I think people care too much about the fact stuff turns into warfare. Y'know, that's the nature of this internet beast for you. Makes for a fun time. But folks always are like...ok guys...take it easy...calm down...

Eh. It's interesting!

[OdysseyOfNoises]

Although some comments have been too over-generalised in this topic, it is not even debatable that Japan has an animal welfare problem, which has manifested itself to posters on this board in a variety of situations across Japan. If that wasn't enough, a quick search on google provides a range of well-sourced articles to back this up.

It may not be wise to make rash generalisations, but the experiences that posters here have alluded to are representative of a well-documented issue.