“Comfort women” denier Michael Yon attacks facts without providing any counter-arguments or evidences

“Journalist” and “Comfort women” denier Michael Yon posted a link to our article, “Debunking the Japanese ‘Comfort Women’ Denier Talking Points” on his blog and on his Facebook page, suggesting that “feminists” are now forced to respond to specific “facts,” presumably because of Mr. Yon’s work exposing the “lies” of “comfort women.”

Mr. Yon writes:

The sex slavery revisionists are now reacting to facts, rather than conducting their blind assaults against Japan and our alliance. The feminists know that the sex slavery narrative is a grand fabrication. The feminists are getting cornered up. Their arguments are collapsing and they know it.

It is curious that Mr. Yon thinks that our article represents a new development in the decades-old debate over “comfort women.” In reality, we merely summarized what actual historians have been saying for many years, and is common knowledge among people who are working toward redress for the victims and survivors of Japanese military “comfort women” system.

If our article seemed like a new development, it is because Mr. Yon is ignorant about the work of Japanese historians and the hundreds of historical documents that they have studied and analyzed. It is understandable that Mr. Yon is completely clueless about the topic because he does not speak or read Japanese, but perhaps he needs to realize that and get out of the business of propagating historical revisionism.

It is telling that while Mr. Yon claims that feminists’ “arguments are collapsing,” he does not dispute or refute any of the facts we presented. Come on, Mr. Yon, give us concrete rebuttal on any and all of the facts we raise! You can’t, can you?

32 thoughts on ““Comfort women” denier Michael Yon attacks facts without providing any counter-arguments or evidences”

  1. As far as I know Mr Yon have been investigating this issue very seriously. What you refer to ‘historical documents’ all speak for Mr Yon’s claim. Perhaps it is a typo for ‘testimonies by Korean women’? It is a common knowledge among ‘mainstream’ scholars that there are many historical documents which speak against the view that Japanese military kidnapped the women and raped or abused. Such views are only commnunicated through the stories by Seiji Yoshida and a few other unreliable sources.

  2. Michael yon is a respected journalist and deserves a more serious and detailed response than this article, which while calling for facts provides none of its own, while perpetrating its own cultural imperialism, by dismissing him because he doesn’t speak Japanese. “Common knowledge” is like “common sense” – it is often an illusion, rare in reality and not to be relied upon.

    1. Okay, let’s take Mr. Yon’s favorite evidence, the IWG report. Does it reveal new evidences that incriminate Japan? No. Does it provide a definitive proof that Japanese “comfort women” system did not involve violation of human rights or international law? No it did not. The IWG was not set out to settle that question, and it is disingenuous to claim that it did.

      Also, cultural imperialism is a white man presenting himself as an authority about someone else’s history that he knows next to nothing about. The problem is not that he doesn’t speak Japanese; the problem is that does not know what actual historians and those who read them are saying about the issue while he attacks them and engages in character assassination against them (e.g. his claim that we are “communists” or pro-China).

  3. The “200.000” number of “comfort women” is the number generally accepted by almost every history book I have read has been denied by the many Japanese who post on Yon’s page and by Yon as well. Try as I might, none of the Japanese posters nor Yon himself has posted a number they all can live with…

    1. The number is not an issue. What matters is the fact that they were high-paid prostitutes or professional camp followers. In fact, there still are many (tens of thousands) Korean prostitutes in Japan and in many other countries.

      1. Denier,
        Are you denying that most Korean “comfort women” were deceived into becoming “comfort women” or sold into the system, and were held by debt bondage? Don’t start “b… but it was done by Korean parents and contractors!” routine: you are claiming that “comfort women” were professional camp followers, so you can’t make the argument that someone other than the Japanese military was responsible. If they were trafficked, regardless of who were responsible, you are clearly wrong to claim that they were simply prostitutes.

        1. The 30 “comfort stations” in the Philippines…were they staffed by Korean women? How did those Korean women get to the Philippines, the facts are about Philippine “comfort stations” are that Filipina girls were forced at the end of a gun and in some cases the girls’ parents were murdered right in front of them if they did not agree to give their daughter to the ruthless and brutal Japanese. In the Philippines the woman were kidnapped in the great majority of cases. The Philippines was just another one of the Japanese invasions turned into a bloodbath which was also a subjegation of the native Filipina women. In some cases Filipina women were raped dozens of times only to be murdered afterwards

    2. The figure is what is called Fermi estimate, which means that it is calculated from a series of other numbers that are themselves estimates, such as the number of Japanese soldiers, the number of comfort stations, the number of women in each comfort stations, the number of transactions each woman had to perform per day, the frequency that each Japanese soldiers visited comfort stations, etc. Because there are wide variance for most of these estimates, the final figure can have even wider range of possibilities. Many historians cite a figure between 50,000 to 200,000, but getting to the exact figure is not what we are concerned about. We are concerned about the fact that the Japanese government established and benefited from a system of enforced military prostitution that led to the trafficking and exploitation of a large number of women from all over Asia, especially Japan and Korea.

      1. I like fendnow for not using the term “sex slaves” for comfort women. Their business was clearly attached to military like many other businesses to serve soldiers and it was legal at that time.
        What offends me and many others is your groundless claims like “enforced” in your message for example.
        Prostitution has been basically a voluntary business until today even though it is now illegal.
        http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2012/06/19/2012061900452.html
        If these present-day comfort women are “enforced” to work, why don’t you try to save them?

        1. You are not answering the question: Are you denying that most Korean “comfort women” were deceived into becoming “comfort women” or sold into the system, and were held by debt bondage?

          If you acknowledge this historical fact, then it would mean that you are being disingenuous for describing “comfort women” as “voluntary” and “professional camp followers.”

          1. Emi,
            Please have a bit more integrity. “Denying” is not the mechanism at play here. You can not deny a negative. The documentation, supporting evidence, and research from academics that conducted the only research on all the Korean Comfort Women clearly points to the same conclusion. The systemic deception and debt bondage as you call it is clearly exaggerated. There is no proof. It is ironically you who are “denying’ the facts in attempting to pull a David Irving and create a narrative bereft of supported facts.

            The Dutch Survey was clear: The women could refuse to work in that service. The Nakayama quote from Yoshimis own book stated that the women were used as nurses for the men as well. The OWI report as well stated they could refuse service for any reason, etc etc etc. The ATIS report was very explicit in highlighting women were sent back to Korea after a year or less in Burma as the initial loan was paid back, and after 1943 due to their safety had to remain in Burma. The Diary of Mrs. Ok is also very explicit that she wished to remain, so the situation from available source documentation refutes your claim.

            Debt bondage is not a legal term, and certainly not one for the time period. If that was the case then almost everyone was in debt bondage to include the soldiers of every army…yet unlike the Comfort Women they could not refuse service for any reason. Debt bondage is a neo-marxist/fascist term that has become fashionable of late (Im sure in Portland coffee shops as well) for “students in debt bondage” due to student loans they voluntarily have taken. Seems like Mr. Yon might not be too far off on the classification of who is promoting this CW as sex slave narrative.

            Steve

            1. The systemic deception and debt bondage as you call it is clearly exaggerated.

              Are you suggesting that deception and/or debt bondage was rare? Or are you saying that they were as commonplace as the rest of the world understand them to be but just not “systemic”? How do you then explain that the Japanese government went out of its way to withhold the application of the 1921 International Convention for Suppression o the Traffic in Women and Children from its colonies, while agreeing to enforce it inside Japan?

              The ATIS report was very explicit in highlighting women were sent back to Korea after a year or less in Burma as the initial loan was paid back, and after 1943 due to their safety had to remain in Burma.

              Which ATIS report are you talking about? If it’s the report No. 120, it does not mention that a single woman was allowed to go back to Korea after their paid off their debt.

              Debt bondage is not a legal term, and certainly not one for the time period. […] Debt bondage is a neo-marxist/fascist term that has become fashionable of late […]

              Debt bondage is a legal term defined in the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery, and it was already illegal when used to force women to engage in prostitution under the 1921 International Convention for Suppression o the Traffic in Women and Children. Further, the 1921 convention prohibited the use of women under age 21 in prostitution even with her consent.

              1. Again, your facts are a bit off.

                ATIS Report 120: Scroll down to this part “The owners made other profits by selling clothing, necessities and luxuries to the girls at exorbitant charges. When a girl is able to repay the sum of money paid to her family, plus interest, she should be provided with a free return passage to KOREA, and then considered free. But owning to war conditions, no one of prisoner of war’s group had so far been allowed to leave; although in June 1943, 15 Army Headquarters had arranged to return home those girls who were free from debt, and one girl who fulfilled these conditions and wished to return was easily persuaded to remain.”

                Note that in June 1943 the Army HQ sent back those women whose contract debts were paid, and one asked to remain. During this time (mid 1943) Allied interdiction for sea lanes was intensifying and most ships were sunk within one year, the Japanese adjusted and most movement in and out of Burma was restricted. Hence the need to build the railway made famous by the Bridge over the River Kwai.

                Legal terms in 1956. The war was 1937-1945 for the Japanese with some operations approaching war from 1931-1933. The Debt Bondage would apply to the signatories to that, and unless time travel is possible, this does not apply to the IJA/IJN units, only the Hague conventions that they signed, and ex post facto aside, we held them to Geneva conventions as well though they did not sign it.

                ONI and GHQ investigators looked at the system and found nothing illegal about it. For the period of 1945 -1947 the US was VERY intent on prosecuting a number of Japanese for a variety of reasons. Same with the UK in the Hong Kong and Singapore trials. When we review many of the cases we see punishments handed down of hard labor for actions such as slapping a PoW repeatedly. IF the Allies had believed there was wrong doing, then the prosecutions would have followed as was the case in Borneo of the Japanese Naval Lt. and accomplices in the Dutch Women incident. Note also that the Naval Lt. was the highest ranking officer tried and convicted, indicating (AGAIN) that the incident was individual vs. systemic and not indicative of the system.

                And as for your attempt to apply the 1921 convention to the events of 1937-1945, note that the IJA regulations for Comfort Women as noted in the Dutch Survey placed the requirement for women to be over 19 years of age, and notes that during one incident of recruitment of the Dutch women a girl was found to have been under 18, and was immediately returned to the camps. The PoW Report No 49 also lists the ages and all are over 19, giving further validation that the system was in place. So again, we have compliance on the part of the IJA…..also if you read the 1921 Convention you will see that Japan in addition to Thailand and the UK for India did not endorse article 5 for the 21 year age limit (but internally maintained it at 18 and for military purposes upped it to 19…when 17 year olds from many nations could and did fill soldier slots to go kill and die). In addition to Japan waiving colonial areas, Britain, Australia, Spain and New Zealand reserve the application to the colonies, protectorate and mandated territories. So these do not apply to the case you are making, which is flimsy indeed.

                1. Legal terms in 1956. The war was 1937-1945 for the Japanese with some operations approaching war from 1931-1933. The Debt Bondage would apply to the signatories to that, and unless time travel is possible, this does not apply to the IJA/IJN units

                  Of course. I’m simply refuting your statement that “debt bondage” is not a legal term and is just a recent fascist/neo-marxist fad. It is a legal term, and even before it was defined in 1956 debt bondage for the purpose of prostitution was prohibited under the 1921 convention (though Japan did reserved its application for its colonies).

                  ONI and GHQ investigators looked at the system and found nothing illegal about it. For the period of 1945 -1947 the US was VERY intent on prosecuting a number of Japanese for a variety of reasons. Same with the UK in the Hong Kong and Singapore trials.

                  I am not surprised that the Allied forces were not as concerned about the human rights violation of Korean and other Asian women the way the U.S., U.K. and Dutch governments were concerned about their citizens. The OWI report No. 49 makes it clear that its author looked down on the women, describing them as ugly and childish. That is why historians look into other evidences in addition to the military reports.

                  Note also that the Naval Lt. was the highest ranking officer tried and convicted, indicating (AGAIN) that the incident was individual vs. systemic and not indicative of the system.

                  I disagree. If you read Japanese military’s internal memos and soldiers’ diaries, it is clear that the motivation behind individual units’ kidnapping and trafficking outside of the direct orders of the central command was the sense of jealousy they held toward other units that had officially sanctioned “comfort stations,” and how they felt deprived of amenities that they were entitled to. Their actions may not have been under the order from the central command, it occurred in the context of the officially sanctioned “comfort women” system that the Japanese military established and benefited from.

                  In addition to Japan waiving colonial areas, Britain, Australia, Spain and New Zealand reserve the application to the colonies, protectorate and mandated territories.

                  In the case of Britain and others, they reserved the application to the colonies because they feared that the convention might interfere with cultural practices in their colonies that involved financial reciprocity for arranged marriages. Japan did so in order to facilitate trafficking of women from its colonies to the frontline.

                  1. I am very disappointed by the lack of depth you display, but hopefully that can change over time.

                    To begin, we were very interested in accusations of crimes against women. Yamashita as well as many others in the Philippine area were sentenced to execution and hung based partially on simply his position of command over units that illegally confined and raped women there. Section 4. The Bill of Particulars and Supplemental Bill of Particulars, Para 2 (2). Contains rape.

                    The IMTFE in its concluding statements “The evidence relating to atrocities and other Conventional War Crimes presented before the Tribunal establishes that from the opening of the war in China until the surrender of Japan in August 1945, torture, murder, rape and other cruelties of the most inhumane and barbarous character were freely practiced by the Japanese Army and Navy.” Again rape is listed prominently and was investigated, prosecuted, and usually death was the punishment. The UK held similar process in both the Hong Kong and Singapore Trials, the KMT did not during the Nanjing Trials, and there is not enough evidence concerning the Soviet Trials to make a comparison.

                    As far as the motives of the Japanese Naval Lt, ascribing responsibility to the command for having a system with controls in place, due to the fact of an individual being “jealous” of that system is incredible. That is almost akin to the justification of Nazi treatment to the Jews due to jealousy at our supposed “success” in Europe and Germany. The Naval Lt, as evidenced not in my interpretation, but under the Dutch military trial post war, was judged guilty, responsible for his own actions, and clearly as evidenced by the investigation finding he was the highest ranking member to violate the systems rules, the one guilty. The system is not to be blamed. He most likely would have conducted illegal confinement and rape as other soldiers have in times of war. To blame a system of voluntary contract prostitutes for the actions of a criminal who ignored and violated the rules of that system is laughable to say the least.

  4. The fact is that there is no evidence of wide-spread sex slavery. Everyone knows the comfort women system existed and exists today, but the sex-slavery part is manufactured. There were a limited number of abuses in Philippines and Indonesia, for which the Japanese government long ago apologized.

    The idea that 200,000 were kidnapped and held as sex slaves, yet there is not a shred of evidence, is ludicrous. It simply did not happen.z

    FeNDs goals are transparently not about human rights. There is sex trafficking and human rights issues around the globe that could use their attentions. Millions of Syrians now are refugees, for instance.

    FeND goal is clear, and that is to weaken the USA and Japan, and to weaken our relationship.

    1. Mr. Yon, you are arguing against a straw argument. As we’ve pointed out in our previous post, which you derisively linked to, virtually all historians rejected the contents of Seiji Yoshida’s testimony by the mid-90s because it did not match up with other evidences and testimonies that have surfaced since. No credible historians, liberal or conservative, are espousing the naive view that you seem to be railing against.

      You have no basis to claim that we are seeking to weaken the US/Japan relationship, or our work is not about human rights. Members of FeND are activists and scholars who have participated in various human rights movements, including the movement addressing sexual violence and human trafficking today, which is how we came to the issue of “comfort women.”

      1. Sorry for jumping in, but to date there have been very few non advocate historians that have taken up the Comfort Women study. As politically charged as it has been since Amanda Park reshaped it during the 121 campaign into a womens rights issue, most believe it actually has to do with modern human trafficking of women and therefore unless specialists in the field, stay away.

        However, as the information has been coming into various departments from a different angle, new information and re-evaluation of existing works is being undertaken. Voices of researchers silenced on this issue (most notably the only two Korean scholars I am aware conducted academic study of the Comfort Women and their testimonies – Prof Emeritus Ahn Byong Jik (Seoul University) and Prof Yuha Park (Sejong University)), have not been provided an outlet. Further, organizations that promote the Comfort Women as sex slave narrative are usually promoting ouster of the US bases in Okinawa as well. In Korea, they are usually pro-Chinese and as in the case of Chon Dae Hyop, which runs the house of sharing and was documented by Professor Park, coerces and manipulates the surviving Korean Comfort Women, are overtly supportive of North Korea and their agenda.

        So perhaps Mr. Yon is not far afield of the actual situation. For women rights, why travel back 70 years? Why overlook cases which are far better examples (actually being examples of human sex trafficking) to highlight the tragedy of human sex trafficking? Perhaps the issue is not actual human rights but political pandering?

        And what to make of the statement here on your site that “We also oppose the U.S. military presence in Okinawa, Hawai’i, and the rest of the Asia-Pacific”?

        1. For women rights, why travel back 70 years?

          It’s not either/or. We need to defend human rights whether the violation took place 70 years ago or it is happening today, especially when there are people today attacking the victims and survivors of human rights violations 70 years ago. We are responding to the ongoing assault on the victims and survivors of the 70 year old issue.

          Why overlook cases which are far better examples (actually being examples of human sex trafficking) to highlight the tragedy of human sex trafficking?

          Well, personally, I actually have been involved in the movement addressing human trafficking for years, before ever doing anything around the “comfort women” issue. “Comfort women” issue is a small part of my activist and scholarly work addressing violence against women and marginalized communities.

          On the other hand, I don’t see any “comfort women” denier doing anything about the contemporary human trafficking or violence against women even as they argue how we should ignore the “comfort women” issue to focus on the present.

          And what to make of the statement here on your site that “We also oppose the U.S. military presence in Okinawa, Hawai’i, and the rest of the Asia-Pacific”?

          We oppose colonialism; it’s in our name, you know?

          1. Im glad that you oppose colonialism, but please enlighten us on the colonialism in Hawaii currently, or Okinawa.

            If indeed opposition to colonialism is your goal then I am sure you will not hesitate to make a public statement on your website decrying the egregious colonialism of the PRC towards the nation of Tibet, Xinjiang, and especially Hong Kong. On that we can agree and share mutual support. I look forward to your public announcement denouncing these horrid acts not only of modern colonialism, but massive human rights violations.

            You state that FeND is concerned about current human trafficking, yet NOWHERE have you made a tweet or posting or expended any energy or resources to do so in the name of FeND. You personally did support a woman right to be a prostitute earlier and decried efforts by local law enforcement in Portland that would curtail that right, so this seems an odd mix to say the least. If this is true, again please expend some efforts to have Union City Mayor Brian Stack stop whitewashing history and make a statue or amend the current Comfort Women statue to reflect the cities recent crimes against women with the 30 young girls ages 13-17 that were brought from Central America by Loiusa Madrano and forced to be sex slaves (as also recorded by the UN). Lets see if you are serious. Pressure Brian Stack to make a statue to the Comfort Women in his very city under his rule. He accepted 10,000 USD from Madrano as she testified in court in 2005, yet all he had to do was give the money back. But that, according to what I interpret FeND goals to be, should not be enough. Go get them Emi, lets see some real results here for human trafficking issues in the US that are impacting the lives of people today, and we don’t need to stretch the truth about “debt bondage” or bend the timelines for 1956 vs 1945. We have clear cut laws both domestic and international, we have clear evidence that these were underage girls kidnapped and held against their will. Right there in Union City where a statue went up August of last year. But where is there statue and where is FeND on this issue?

            1. Im glad that you oppose colonialism, but please enlighten us on the colonialism in Hawaii currently, or Okinawa.

              We support indigenous struggles for sovereignty or greater self-determination in Okinawa, Hawai’i, and the rest of the Pacific. I get that you totally disagree, so let’s not waste time here.

              If indeed opposition to colonialism is your goal then I am sure you will not hesitate to make a public statement on your website decrying the egregious colonialism of the PRC towards the nation of Tibet, Xinjiang, and especially Hong Kong.

              Absolutely. Why is there even a question?

              You state that FeND is concerned about current human trafficking, yet NOWHERE have you made a tweet or posting or expended any energy or resources to do so in the name of FeND.

              Unfortunately, we are busy challenging the rising influence of far-right extremists in our communities (Japanese communities in the U.S.) re “comfort women” right now and that is the focus of our work currently as an organization. We hope to have the capacity to do more–for example, about the current military violence around U.S. bases in Okinawa, Guam, and elsewhere.

              You personally did support a woman right to be a prostitute earlier and decried efforts by local law enforcement in Portland that would curtail that right, so this seems an odd mix to say the least.

              You don’t need to oppose agriculture altogether to oppose human trafficking and labor rights violation in agriculture. In fact, supporting farmworkers means both supporting their legal right as workers *and* opposing human trafficking. How is the sex trade any different?

              1. So you can see where the confusion lies within your stated goals on your page combined with your actions, and those that you purport when pressed. They are at odds.

                Again this goes back to the fundamental question: Why are you spending so much time on an issue of 70 years ago which is clearly exaggerated at best, and fabricated at worst, instead of constructive efforts to either create your own or support identification, rescue, and rehabilitation efforts for current human sex trafficking. You say you are “too busy” fighting this apparent threat from right wing Japanese, who are debating history, yet not actually contributing to or participating in human sex trafficking.

                If its a historical event you are more comfortable dealing with I again ask you to stand firm against Brian Stack and Union City and press them. All of the children from that sex slave ring are still alive, Louisa Madrano was never sentenced (she reached a plea deal) so there is still justice to be done. You can start with awareness on the statue of the Comfort Women there (Simply ask “Where is there statue?” for the Central American girls) and press for the city to first recognize, then provide justice and redress for the girls. But sadly, again I think you will say you are “too busy” fighting historical debtors and tilting at windmills.

  5. Emi,
    Unfortunately this is more political jingoism than actual facts, the “historians” tenuous at best, Yoshimi Yoshiaki and George Hicks being almost carbon copies, present information with a high degree of both confirmation bias and extrapolation beyond Fermi. In military operations it is not a direct correlation on anything but standard equipment. Looking for example at tanks within an armored unit, or a unit provided armored support we would see a ratio in Northern China operations at the time of the Nomonhan incident of 376 to 1 (376 soldiers per armored vehicle). Extrapolating that for the Japanese Army would provide a completely false historical analysis. Comfort Women were not stationed equally, and therefore using extrapolation is extremely lazy and inaccurate. In addition,

    Yoshiaki admits (p.29) that he is only guessing at the numbers themselves. Later he attempts to backtrack (p.57) by showing one mobilization projection document and attempts to use the ratio to extrapolate a required mobilization of 20,000 CW. Again, his blatant ignorance of military operations shows. The memorandum is from a very junior leader, and the logistical requirements for an additional 20,000 non essential or even second tier essential personnel would be larger than the Japanese were reporting. The 800,000 mobilization of course never occurred during that planned operations because the IJA and Kwantung Army simply did not have the resources for additional mobilizations. Further, aside from the “dream sheet” the soldier wrote, no supporting evidence has been brought forth by Yoshiaki, despite his press announcements to the contrary.

    It appears he is more concerned with politics than historical accuracy. Then again, his methodology looks more like David Irving, where he presents one small piece, ignores context and source documentation to the contrary, then makes a case…i.e. Denying the evidence. Yes, in this case those that follow Yoshiaki and his work are more in the Denier camp than we have seen from the Comfort Women as sex slave side. His extrapolation later (p48) again takes a stab in the dark with assuming the 14th Mixed Brigade (with only 33 Korean and 3 Japanese) was the standard for all the rest of the units. This completely ignores his own writing that the Comfort Women program was left up to local commanders. Situational conditions in each area were widely different and therefore extrapolating without taking into account each theaters and even each postings conditions is again extremely shabby by any academic standard.

    Further, p48 Yoshiaki presents cases quite the opposite for the narrative the CW Lobby tends to portray: He states the testimony of Tadao Nakayama, Director of the Medical Institute in China as having been bumped off a flight as the “Women Army” took precedent over soldiers, the officers having prioritized them for travel even over a medical director. Far from being upset (most Westerners certainly would have been), he is further quoted by Yoshiaki as saying “The Girl Army were more than prostitutes…, they became nurses as tender as wives to the young soldiers”. So here is evidence that supports other source documentation that indeed the Comfort Women at times DID conduct medical support for the soldiers. An inconvenient truth for the fascists when trying to spin the PoW Report 49 into a support for the CW as sex slaves narrative.

    The book is FILLED with similar inaccuracies, inferences beyond logic, cognitive dissonance, and what appear to be either outright fabrications, or perhaps Yoshiaki is simply out of his league when researching anything related to military history. However, I tend to think this was intentional and not just lack of ability. His press release and reference to six documents as ‘definitive proof’ while later none of them was even close to such, seems to be an attempt at theatrical politics and not academic rigour.

    So this, and by extension George Hicks who took most of his work whole cloth from Yoshiaki, are poor examples to hold for what FeND and other fascist groups present at a majority of historians.

    Finally, a note regarding working conditions. Aside from the above quoted testimony in Yoshiakis own book, we have of course report number 49, the ATIS roll up of the OWI/ONI and GHQ reports now ensconced at the MacAuthor Library, testimonies from Australian PoWs who were forced to work for the Comfort Women, and recent research by independent Thai professors that corroborate the “Contracted Prostitute” narrative and discredit the “sex slave” one. As noted in PoW Report 49, the women could refuse service for any reason. The Dutch Survey has testimony from the Dutch women (not the group of 38 that were coerced, to which the Japanese Naval LT was prosecuted both in the IJN and post war), that when they were taken from the camp and entered the restaurant attached to the brothel, they found out what the actual operation was. They were unwilling to do it, and were promptly returned to the camp. In other words this supports the standing regulations from both the IJA and IJN that the women MUST be volunteers (in addition to over 19 years of age, free from disease, etc). So we can see that the incidents used to broadcast the sex slave narrative (Jan Ruff OHeerne) is clearly documented and an anomaly rather than the rule. It was individual vs. systemic abuse.

    The bottom line is that we have to go off the evidence provided. Wishful thinking and fantasy that the Japanese abducted or mass coerced and held against their will tens of thousands of women for forced sexual services, like space alien abduction, is heavy on a very few witness testimonies and contradicted by almost all of the facts, to include ironically much of what is promoted in the literature by Yoshiaki, Hicks, etc. The definition of slavery tends to be watered down, such that anyone who takes a payroll advance and must work it off under contract is considered a slave. If that is the case then most people are slaves today in a variety of jobs, especially contractors. It is disgusting that real victims of human sex trafficking are overlooked in order to perpetuate and propagandize this myth, and terms such as slave watered down in order to try and fit them to the system the Japanese had in place at the time, but not across the board to all the other nations that did the same.

    Its clearly political and transparent. The above are only some of the facts, source document analysis can of course be ongoing, but the denials coming from FeND is remarkable and something to make David Irving proud. We haven’t even begun to look into the analysis of the testimony conducted by Professor Emeritus Ahn Byong Jik (Seoul University) when he worked for the Pacific Womens Victims group, nor Professor Yuha Park (Sejong University), a woman whose voice was silenced by the fascist Park regime for daring to publish an academic work on the evaluation of the Comfort Women and their manipulation by Chong Dae Hyop, an extremist group closely tied to the present hate mongering.

    1. Comfort Women were not stationed equally, and therefore using extrapolation is extremely lazy and inaccurate.

      Yes, it is unreliable and has a range of variance that is pretty large, but if not using Fermi how else would you estimate the number of “comfort women” when there is no centralized record? It’s more “lazy” to throw up your hands and give up just because the accurate count is unavailable.

      So here is evidence that supports other source documentation that indeed the Comfort Women at times DID conduct medical support for the soldiers.

      In other words, “comfort women” were recruited under the premise that they would be working as nurses, but they were forced to work as prostitutes who “at times” worked as nurses according to this source. How does that change anything?

      As noted in PoW Report 49, the women could refuse service for any reason.

      Again, how does that change anything, if the only way they could survive (they had to repay debt and purchase food and clothing from the “house maters” according to the same report) was to engage in prostitution?

      You seem to continuously take these minor details out of context and present them as if they are a game changer, which I consider disingenuous.

      (not the group of 38 that were coerced, to which the Japanese Naval LT was prosecuted both in the IJN and post war)

      As far as I know the IJN did not prosecute those responsible for the incident. They were prosecuted by the Dutch tribunal.

      It is disgusting that real victims of human sex trafficking are overlooked in order to perpetuate and propagandize this myth, and terms such as slave watered down in order to try and fit them to the system the Japanese had in place at the time, but not across the board to all the other nations that did the same.

      Actually, the experiences of “comfort women” are very similar to that of contemporary human trafficking victims, who are usually not forcibly kidnapped, chained, nor completely unpaid. They are typically recruited through deception and are trapped in debt bondage and economic exploitation that they cannot escape.

      Steven, I have a question. Are you the American who fed Mr. Yon with all these cherry-picked information to get him started on this topic in the first place? He has publicly said that “an American” told him about all this and persuaded him to follow up on it, so I’m wondering if you are the one.

      1. Again your information is incorrect and confirmation bias runs throughout. You stated above that the women were forced. Again, we are looking for evidence of this. Where is it? The testimony provided to the OWI teams shows clearly they were not. So where do you get the statement they were forced?

        In addition your comment ‘the only way they could survive” is again completely baseless and at odds from the facts. Where is the evidence? The OWI purpose was to find propaganda in the CBI theater to separate the Japanese from the Asian allies to include the Koreans. The fact that 20 Prostitutes were separated from the Japanese and interrogated for almost a month while the Burma front was rapidly moving forward and alot of Japanese were being captured and new intelligence brought in shows a large amount of command focus. The US OWI wanted to find something to be able to use against the Japanese and split the Korean support for their efforts. As any good propagandist knows women and sex makes for emotional fire. However, the fact that the teams, despite their best efforts for almost a month, found nothing is very evident. If even a rumor of what you have purported above were true and the ladies knew or had heard of it….the elicitation teams from the OWI would have documented it for future exploitation. “The only way they could survive” again is not supported by any source document. Nor even from the original testimonies of the Korean Comfort Women, nor supported by the only academic research done in Korea by Koreans.

        For the Dutch trial the Dutch Survey was clear that the Naval Lt had been reprimanded and removed (Censored was the word used as translated from Dutch), and the system of Comfort Stations in the Borneo region was shut down for approximately two months pending investigations. When it re-opened it was with additional controls in place (no recruiting from the camps, only existing prostitutes, and those outside the camps could be used).

        “The American” that cherry picks information. Please tell me your not preparing a tin foil hat as we speak? Knowing what I do of Mr. Yon from the internet, this probably fills a need to get to the truth amidst a sadly obscuring and politically motivated deception campaign. He did the same in going against the US narrative in Afghanistan, saying the war was already lost. You should probably ask him directly who this mystery man is….sorry to seem sarcastic but it does seem rather conspiratorial. Who was the “mystery person” who cherry picked your information and got you involved in this?

  6. Did Michael Yon know about Tony Marano and started working with him; was he actually recruited by the revisionists or he’s doing the revisionism himself?

  7. The term “comfort women” actually is inaccurate considering that a large number of these so-called women were children. Anybody who denies this is an apologist for child rape, like Michael Yon.

  8. Whatever the consequences, Michael Yon stopped working with Yoshiko Sakurai in 2015 because of the Revisionist Film about Comfort Women which lacks displaying American Values. However, he continues to self-campaign his denials about them.

Leave a Reply to Steven Goldman Cancel reply