Nearly a third of Japan's women 'sexually harassed at work'
Justin McCurry in Tokyo
Wednesday 2 March 2016 09.52 GMT
【世界への恥さらし】日本の職場におけるセクハラ実態をイギリスのガーディアン紙が報道
これは当ブログでも取り上げた。
恥さらしは恥さらしだが、ググると
1 In 3 Women Has Been Sexually Harassed At Work, According To Survey
02/19/2015 04:34 pm ET | Updated Feb 19, 2015
A new survey found that one in three women between the ages of 18-34 has been sexually harassed at work.
Cosmopolitan surveyed 2,235 full-time and part-time female employees and found that one in three women has experienced sexual harassment at work at some point their lives.
"Sexual harassment hasn't gone away -- it's just taken on new forms," Michelle Ruiz and Lauren Ahn wrote. Unlike workplace sexual harassment portrayed in films and pop culture that represent it as overtly aggressive, sexual harassment at work isn't always easy to spot. It can be a sexual comment in a meeting or even an insinuating Facebook message.
アメリカでも同じ３人に１人の女性がセクハラをうけている。
イギリスでは、
１０人に６人、
ということは、
Japan performs poorly in international gender equality comparisons. In the World Economic Forum’s 2015 global gender gap index, it ranked 101st out of 145 countries.
男女格差世界ランキングとは関係なく職場のセクハラはある、ということだ。
ここらへん、ちょっと調べればわかることなんだが、外国人特派員というのは、日本人についてほとんど何も知らない。
日本語の新聞はほとんど読まない。
自国については、無批判で、産経新聞相当のことかしか知らない。
日本で、そして、世界で何が起きているわからない人が、Japan Times やKYODO などの英語記事を読んで、あるいは、個人の英語ブログを読んで、記事を書いているだけだから、いきおい固定観念にそった線で、記事をうめざるえない。
この件に関しては、しかし、世界に恥さらだろうが、そうでなかろうが、アメリカでも日本でも、セクハラはなくすようにすべきだ。
「ミュージカル『アニー』の初代主役から東大法学部を卒業し、検察官になった異色の経歴の持ち主。才色兼備の法律のプロです。まだ当選２回ですが、愛知７区の選出で選挙も強い。将来の総理候補のひとりといわれています」（政界関係者）
女性総理も出したいものだよなああ、日本から。
The rise of American authoritarianism
A niche group of political scientists may have uncovered what's driving Donald Trump's ascent. What they found has implications that go well beyond 2016.
by Amanda Taub on March 1, 2016
わりにおもしろい記事。
階層的秩序を重んじる権威主義者たちは、脅威にさらされると、政府の実働的権力で、脅威の排除を誓う、力強い指導者を求める。
現代アメリカは、外からはISISやロシア、イランなどの脅威に晒されているとメディアが煽り、国内では、既存の秩序が地殻変動をおこし、外国人移民、有色人や性的マイノリティー、イスラム教徒などが平等の権利を主張して、白人が既存の特権を享受できなくなっている。
こうした脅威・不安にさらされること、権威主義者たちが突然目覚めたように、自分たちが抱える恐怖感の対象を力づくて押しつぶしてくれる強力な指導者を求めるーーーそれが大統領候補トランプ氏だ、と。
仮にトランプ氏が民主党に負けても、少数弱者が勢いづく社会変革が起きている状況は変わらず、また、外国の危険を煽る大手メディアがなくなるわけではないので、権威主義者たちが、力で持って不安な対象を制する強力な指導者を求める傾向は続くであろう、と。
伝統的価値観を重視する共和党が分裂し、既存の共和党勢力と、これに加えて、脅威を力で圧倒する行動を取ると誓う共和党権威主義者派のような派閥ができるのではないか、と。
A niche group of political scientists may have uncovered what's driving Donald Trump's ascent. What they found has implications that go well beyond 2016.
by Amanda Taub on March 1, 2016
わりにおもしろい記事。
Perhaps strangest of all, it wasn't just Trump but his supporters who seemed to have come out of nowhere, suddenly expressing, in large numbers, ideas far more extreme than anything that has risen to such popularity in recent memory. In South Carolina, a CBS News exit poll found that 75 percent of Republican voters supported banning Muslims from the United States. A PPP poll found that a third of Trump voters support banning gays and lesbians from the country. Twenty percent said Lincoln shouldn't have freed the slaves.
Last September, a PhD student at the University of Massachusetts Amherst named Matthew MacWilliams realized that his dissertation research might hold the answer to not just one but all three of these mysteries.
MacWilliams studies authoritarianism — not actual dictators, but rather a psychological profile of individual voters that is characterized by a desire for order and a fear of outsiders. People who score high in authoritarianism, when they feel threatened, look for strong leaders who promise to take whatever action necessary to protect them from outsiders and prevent the changes they fear.
Their book concluded that the GOP, by positioning itself as the party of traditional values and law and order, had unknowingly attracted what would turn out to be a vast and previously bipartisan population of Americans with authoritarian tendencies.
This trend had been accelerated in recent years by demographic and economic changes such as immigration, which "activated" authoritarian tendencies, leading many Americans to seek out a strongman leader who would preserve a status quo they feel is under threat and impose order on a world they perceive as increasingly alien.
Authoritarians are thought to express much deeper fears than the rest of the electorate, to seek the imposition of order where they perceive dangerous change, and to desire a strong leader who will defeat those fears with force.
Trump, it turns out, is just the symptom. The rise of American authoritarianism is transforming the Republican Party and the dynamics of national politics, with profound consequences likely to extend well beyond this election.
According to Stenner's theory, there is a certain subset of people who hold latent authoritarian tendencies. These tendencies can be triggered or "activated" by the perception of physical threats or by destabilizing social change, leading those individuals to desire policies and leaders that we might more colloquially call authoritarian.
It is as if, the NYU professor Jonathan Haidt has written, a button is pushed that says, "In case of moral threat, lock down the borders, kick out those who are different, and punish those who are morally deviant."
This is, after all, a time of social change in America. The country is becoming more diverse, which means that many white Americans are confronting race in a way they have never had to before. Those changes have been happening for a long time, but in recent years they have become more visible and harder to ignore. And they are coinciding with economic trends that have squeezed working-class white people.
But political scientists say this theory explains much more than just Donald Trump, placing him within larger trends in American politics: polarization, the rightward shift of the Republican Party, and the rise within that party of a dissident faction challenging GOP orthodoxies and upending American politics.
Other researchers, like Hetherington, take a slightly different view. They believe that authoritarians aren't "activated" — they've always held their authoritarian preferences — but that they only come to express those preferences once they feel threatened by social change or some kind of threat from outsiders
Together, those three insights added up to one terrifying theory: that if social change and physical threats coincided at the same time, it could awaken a potentially enormous population of American authoritarians, who would demand a strongman leader and the extreme policies necessary, in their view, to meet the rising threats.
The first thing that jumped out from the data on authoritarians is just how many there are. Our results found that 44 percent of white respondents nationwide scored as "high" or "very high" authoritarians, with 19 percent as "very high." That's actually not unusual, and lines up with previous national surveys that found that the authoritarian disposition is far from rare
They trace the trend to the 1960s, when the Republican Party shifted electoral strategies to try to win disaffected Southern Democrats, in part by speaking to fears of changing social norms — for example, the racial hierarchies upset by civil rights. The GOP also embraced a "law and order" platform with a heavily racial appeal to white voters who were concerned about race riots.
Authoritarians, we found in our survey, tend to most fear threats that come from abroad, such as ISIS or Russia or Iran. These are threats, the researchers point out, to which people can put a face; a scary terrorist or an Iranian ayatollah. Non-authoritarians were much less afraid of those threats.
that non-authoritarians who are sufficiently frightened of physical threats such as terrorism could essentially be scared into acting like authoritarians.
That's important, because for years now, Republican politicians and Republican-leaning media such as Fox News have been telling viewers nonstop that the world is a terrifying place and that President Obama isn't doing enough to keep Americans safe.
But the research on authoritarianism suggests it's not just physical threats driving all this. There should be another kind of threat — larger, slower, less obvious, but potentially even more powerful — pushing authoritarians to these extremes: the threat of social change.
This could come in the form of evolving social norms, such as the erosion of traditional gender roles or evolving standards in how to discuss sexual orientation. It could come in the form of rising diversity, whether that means demographic changes from immigration or merely changes in the colors of the faces on TV. Or it could be any changes, political or economic, that disrupt social hierarchies.
What these changes have in common is that, to authoritarians, they threaten to take away the status quo as they know it — familiar, orderly, secure — and replace it with something that feels scary because it is different and destabilizing, but also sometimes because it upends their own place in society. According to the literature, authoritarians will seek, in response, a strong leader who promises to suppress the scary changes, if necessary by force, and to preserve the status quo.
And America is at a point when the status quo social order is changing rapidly; when several social changes are converging. And they are converging especially on working-class white people.
Working-class communities have come under tremendous economic strain since the recession. And white people are also facing the loss of the privileged position that they previously were able to take for granted. Whites are now projected to become a minority group over the next few decades, owing to migration and other factors. The president is a black man, and nonwhite faces are growing more common in popular culture. Nonwhite groups are raising increasingly prominent political demands, and often those demands coincide with issues such as policing that also speak to authoritarian concerns.
What is most likely, Hetherington suggested, is that authoritarians are much more susceptible to messages that tell them to fear a specific "other" — whether or not they have a preexisting animus against that group. Those fears would therefore change over time as events made different groups seem more or less threatening.
It all depends, he said, on whether a particular group of people has been made into an outgroup or not — whether they had been identified as a dangerous other.
Since September 2001, some media outlets and politicians have painted Muslims as the other and as dangerous to America.
What stands out from the results, Feldman wrote after reviewing our data, is that authoritarians "are most willing to want to use force, to crack down on immigration, and limit civil liberties."
This "action side" of authoritarianism, he believed, was the key thing that distinguished Trump supporters from supporters of other GOP candidates. "The willingness to use government power to eliminate the threats — that is most clear among Trump supporters."
"Many Republicans seem to be threatened by terrorism, violence, and cultural diversity, but that's not unique to Trump supporters," Feldman told me.
"It seems to be the action side of authoritarianism — the willingness to use government power to eliminate the threats — that is most clear among Trump supporters," he added.
This, Feldman explained to me, is "classic authoritarian leadership style: simple, powerful, and punitive."
If Trump loses the election, that will not remove the threats and social changes that trigger the "action side" of authoritarianism. The authoritarians will still be there. They will still look for candidates who will give them the strong, punitive leadership they desire.
And so the rise of authoritarianism as a force within American politics means we may now have a de facto three-party system: the Democrats, the GOP establishment, and the GOP authoritarians.
階層的秩序を重んじる権威主義者たちは、脅威にさらされると、政府の実働的権力で、脅威の排除を誓う、力強い指導者を求める。
現代アメリカは、外からはISISやロシア、イランなどの脅威に晒されているとメディアが煽り、国内では、既存の秩序が地殻変動をおこし、外国人移民、有色人や性的マイノリティー、イスラム教徒などが平等の権利を主張して、白人が既存の特権を享受できなくなっている。
こうした脅威・不安にさらされること、権威主義者たちが突然目覚めたように、自分たちが抱える恐怖感の対象を力づくて押しつぶしてくれる強力な指導者を求めるーーーそれが大統領候補トランプ氏だ、と。
仮にトランプ氏が民主党に負けても、少数弱者が勢いづく社会変革が起きている状況は変わらず、また、外国の危険を煽る大手メディアがなくなるわけではないので、権威主義者たちが、力で持って不安な対象を制する強力な指導者を求める傾向は続くであろう、と。
伝統的価値観を重視する共和党が分裂し、既存の共和党勢力と、これに加えて、脅威を力で圧倒する行動を取ると誓う共和党権威主義者派のような派閥ができるのではないか、と。
We're live in France's lesser known refugee camp near Dunkirk, where living conditions are horrific.
仏、ダンケルク 難民たち。
泥の上にテントを建ててくらしている。
Right-wing host asks MSNBC: How can Christians vote for Trump after he said Romney ‘offered to blow him’?
David Edwards DAVID EDWARDS
03 MAR 2016 AT 16:07 ET
自分のことを批判したミット・ロムニーについて、彼はかつて、支持が欲しくて、俺に懇願していたんだ、と、トランプ氏。
「おれが跪け、といえば、跪いていただろう」と。
これについて、キリスト教右翼の論者が、「膝まずいて、チンポコなめろ」なんて言う人を大統領にしていいのか、と。
私は、跪け、は屈従を象徴しているのか、と思ったんですが、性的な意味合いもあるのかもしれませんね。
少なくとも、そう取る人はいる、わけですね。
David Edwards DAVID EDWARDS
03 MAR 2016 AT 16:07 ET
Acording to conservative radio host Andrew McKay, Republican evangelical voters should not choose Donald Trump because he suggested that former GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney offered to give him oral sex.
“He was begging for my endorsement,” Trump said. “I could have said, ‘Mitt, drop to your knees.’ He would have dropped to his knees.”
Following the speech, MSNBC’s Thomas Roberts asked McKay, who hosts a radio show in Pensacola, for his reaction.
“We live in an area that styles itself as being very Christian, lots of churches, evangelical voters, Baptists, Catholics, this whole area is dominated by religion,” McKay explained. “And I think they have to all ask themselves the question, do they want someone who gets up there and says that a former presidential candidate for their party got down on his knees and offered to blow him?”
“That was the style of the candidate that you want to elect as your nominee?” he asked. “That’s what a lot of people are struggling with.”
自分のことを批判したミット・ロムニーについて、彼はかつて、支持が欲しくて、俺に懇願していたんだ、と、トランプ氏。
「おれが跪け、といえば、跪いていただろう」と。
これについて、キリスト教右翼の論者が、「膝まずいて、チンポコなめろ」なんて言う人を大統領にしていいのか、と。
私は、跪け、は屈従を象徴しているのか、と思ったんですが、性的な意味合いもあるのかもしれませんね。
少なくとも、そう取る人はいる、わけですね。
自分より恵まれていない女の子に、バービー人形、日本で行けばリカちゃん人形を集めて、児童養護施設やシェルターに寄付する、ちょっとでも笑顔になってもらえれば、と。
日本では、タイガーマスクが注目されたけど、こういう活動もどんどん宣伝してほしいですね。
デフレ脱却前の消費税率引き上げは間違い
ではどのような対策を行う必要があるのだろうか。図表からも明らかなとおり、家計最終消費支出の落ち込みが続く主因は2014年4月から始まった消費税増税である。安倍政権は2014年末に2015年10月に予定していた8％から10％への消費税増税を延期して、2017年4月からの増税を表明したが、その後も家計消費の低迷は続いている。
消費税増税を主因とする総需要の低迷や原油価格の大幅な低下により、日銀は2％のインフレ目標達成時期を2017年度前半頃まで後ずれさせている。これを念頭におくと、予定通り2017年4月から消費税増税を行えば、デフレ脱却を完全に果たし得ないまま政府は再び増税に踏み切ることになる。デフレ脱却を果たさぬまま消費税増税を行った場合、その悪影響を抑制するための財政政策はほぼ効力を持ち得ない
デフレギャップを埋め、かつ「消費の底割れ」が生じている家計最終消費支出をトレンドに引き戻すためには8％から5％への消費税減税を行う必要があることがわかる。
社会保障の財源を消費税増税に頼るのではなく、経済成長による税収増や現行の相続税を廃止の上で新たに100兆円とも言われる相続対象資産に一律に20％の税率を課すといった対策を行えば、消費税率は5％据え置きでも問題ないと筆者は考える。
それで、いいんなら、それでいいし、あと、累進課税を上げればいいんじゃないの？
Groupthink
is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome
グループ内で、調和や協調を願う気持ちが強すぎて、不合理で機能不全の意思決定の結果に従うことになる現象。
This does not fit with Washington’s narrative. As a result, much of the American press is reporting the opposite of what is actually happening. Many news reports suggest that Aleppo has been a “liberated zone” for three years but is now being pulled back into misery.
Americans are being told that the virtuous course in Syria is to fight the Assad regime and its Russian and Iranian partners. We are supposed to hope that a righteous coalition of Americans, Turks, Saudis, Kurds, and the “moderate opposition” will win.
This is convoluted nonsense, but Americans cannot be blamed for believing it. We have almost no real information about the combatants, their goals, or their tactics. Much blame for this lies with our media.
Under intense financial pressure, most American newspapers, magazines, and broadcast networks have drastically reduced their corps of foreign correspondents. Much important news about the world now comes from reporters based in Washington. In that environment, access and credibility depend on acceptance of official paradigms. Reporters who cover Syria check with the Pentagon, the State Department, the White House, and think tank “experts.” After a spin on that soiled carousel, they feel they have covered all sides of the story. This form of stenography produces the pabulum that passes for news about Syria.
Astonishingly brave correspondents in the war zone, including Americans, seek to counteract Washington-based reporting. At great risk to their own safety, these reporters are pushing to find the truth about the Syrian war. Their reporting often illuminates the darkness of groupthink. Yet for many consumers of news, their voices are lost in the cacophony. Reporting from the ground is often overwhelmed by the Washington consensus.
Washington-based reporters tell us that one potent force in Syria, al-Nusra, is made up of “rebels” or “moderates,” not that it is the local al-Qaeda franchise. Saudi Arabia is portrayed as aiding freedom fighters when in fact it is a prime sponsor of ISIS. Turkey has for years been running a “rat line” for foreign fighters wanting to join terror groups in Syria, but because the United States wants to stay on Turkey’s good side, we hear little about it. Nor are we often reminded that although we want to support the secular and battle-hardened Kurds, Turkey wants to kill them. Everything Russia and Iran do in Syria is described as negative and destabilizing, simply because it is they who are doing it — and because that is the official line in Washington.
Inevitably, this kind of disinformation has bled into the American presidential campaign
Americans are said to be ignorant of the world. We are, but so are people in other countries. If people in Bhutan or Bolivia misunderstand Syria, however, that has no real effect. Our ignorance is more dangerous, because we act on it.
シリア情勢について、アメリカでは、アメリカは穏健派やクルド軍を支援して、サウジアラビやトルコ、と協力して、ISISを打倒すればいい、ロシアやイランがあやることはすべて間違っている、と思い込んでいる人が多いが、現実には、穏健派と言われているのは、過激派アルカイダだし、サウジアラビアはISISのスポンサーだし、トルコは過激派の足場になっているし、トルコはクルド軍を殺戮したがっている、ことを知らない。
というのは、経費節約のために、特派員が現地で取材しておらず、ペンタゴンや、国務省、ホワイトハウス、各種研究機関の”専門家”からの情報を鵜呑みにして垂れ流しているだけであり、現地からの報道で、集団思考を打破しようと思っても、政府の相違によって打ち消されてしまうのだ、と。
アメリカ人は世界情勢に疎い、といわれる。それはアメリカ人に限った話ではないが、アメリカは国を滅ぼすほど巨大な権力をもっているので、アメリカ人の無知は危険だ、と。
ーーーシリア情勢というのは情報戦がすさまじくて、何が真相かなかなかわかりくくなってきている。
で、アメリカのメディアについていわれることは、英米のジャーナリストが、日本のメディアについて言っているようなことであることに注意。
いつもデタラメを発信している日本にいる外国人特派員に、日本の情勢や日本のメディアについて意見を聴くなど愚の骨頂
さらに、メディアの情報がアメリカ世論や、政府の方針さえ決めているところにも注目。
日本に関する報道状況をみていると、いざとなったらアメリカに頼ろうというのは無謀だろう。
また、アメリカ人のGroupthinkの傾向にも注目。
Groupthink
is a term first used in 1972 by social psychologist Irving L. Janis that refers to a psychological phenomenon in which people strive for consensus within a group. In many cases, people will set aside their own personal beliefs or adopt the opinion of the rest of the group.
People who are opposed to the decisions or overriding opinion of the group as a whole frequently remain quiet, preferring to keep the peace rather than disrupt the uniformity of the crowd.
アメリカ人というと、みんながどうであろうと、自分はこうする！という傾向が強そうであるが、それは嘘。
そうありたいという願望はあるのかもしれないが、たいていは、そうなっていない。
同調圧力で、自分の意見がないか、自分の意見よりも、みんなの意見に従ってしまう傾向はアメリカ人にも強い。
慰安婦問題における、アメリカ人ジャーナリスト、識者をみていればわかるではないか。
（集団主義・個人主義）
真実やいかに、といったところ。
いずれにせよ、東京オリンピックはやめられるんなら、やめたほうがいいんないかな。
準備している連中がなにか、税金の無駄遣いをなんとも思っていない、貪欲な汚い連中に見えてきたな。
あんなんだったら、福島復興に金使ってもらったほうがよほどよい。
フォロー
獄卒 CL⇔ROWN
@nero_clown
『お客様は神様だろ？』という変な客がいたんだが隣の席に座ってたガチムチな黒人のお兄さんが立ち上がり『神はアラーだけだ！お前はふざけてんのか！？』とバリバリの日本語でキレだしその客をビビらせて帰らせた。お礼を言うと『実は僕仏教なんだけどね』と笑って帰ってった
21,213
リツイート
16,768
いいね もっさんtomo@MT行けない乙秋とくとonim@Z33ライダー兼・釣り人部分的みんぞう中沢UGRaysマダム・ジェダイト（村上 泰子）
9:09 - 2016年2月19日
”黒人のお兄さん”たちのイメージ向上に貢献した。
弟の前で、おならをして、その反応を喜ぶ女性。
デリメの記事の見出しが、
That's not very ladylike!
女らしくない、
まだ、こういう表現が使われているんですね。