national

Harassment book seeks to raise awareness of minority discrimination

44 Comments

A handbook on "SOGI" or sexual orientation and gender identity harassment has been released in Japan by a group supporting sexual minorities in a bid to raise awareness about discrimination against such individuals.

The book "Hajimeyou! SOGI hara no nai gakkou, shokuba zukuri" (Let's start making schools and workplaces without SOGI harassment!) was compiled last month by the group, which advocates eliminating the use of cruel and derogatory words against sexual minorities and advancing society's acceptance of them.

"SOGI harassment is a matter of life. There are people among sexual minority groups who feel they don't belong anywhere, and have committed suicide (as a result)," said Gon Matsunaka, head of the group named Nakuso! SOGI hara jikkou iinkai (Let's get rid of SOGI hara! executive committee).

He said he especially wants those who have little or no experience interacting with sexual minorities to read the book and encourage others to become accepting of sexual and gender diversity.

The book presents typical situations of SOGI harassment, with some shown in comic strips.

Examples include one in which a gay student is ignored by classmates and another where a transgender woman is pressured by her superior to transfer or quit because she is "disturbing the peace of the workplace."

The group also devotes a large part of the book to school-based cases, as adolescence is often a fraught period for many who wonder about their sexual orientation and gender identity.

The book says school personnel need to realize "it isn't that students of sexual minorities don't exist, but that (school) isn't a safe space to come forward." The guide asks them to be properly informed and act in the best interest of the person involved.

The book also details the risks involved in "outing," where someone may spill a person's identity or orientation to a third party without the person's consent.

Cases have occurred in which teachers have been consulted by a student regarding gender identity or sexual orientation but have then told the student's parents about the matter.

"It's important (for teachers) to confirm with the student about the student's intentions and just how much information they are comfortable with being disclosed," the group advises.

The book, published by Otsuki Shoten, sells for 1,728 yen ($16.30) including tax.

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

44 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

There is still a long way to go with regards to LGBTQ awareness, people should be free to express their sexual identity without being harassed.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Cases have occurred in which teachers have been consulted by a student regarding gender identity or sexual orientation but have then told the student's parents about the matter.

This happens far too often in Japanese public schools, and in some cases, from person experience, where crimes have occurred, the school does the opposite, and does not tell the parents about the activities of their children.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Awareness of these issues typically isn't going to come from a book or a comic - it comes from experience, and unfortunately its a bad one.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I wish more people would read books.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Is this about acceptance, or is it attempting to indoctrinate?

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

If you want everyone to love and accept you,

you are looking in the wrong place-

It starts with yourself.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

This topic requires a nuanced common sense approach which respects the rights and preferences of everyone.

Any sort of harassment and mistreatment of the LGBTQ community is wrong and should be discouraged. There is no question about that.

At the same time, highlighting the need to respect the LGBTQ community should not be used as a trojan horse vehicle to promote such lifestyles to school children against the wishes of parents. Nor should it be used as a virtue signalling, victim/aggressor wedge as a way to browbeat those who have an aversion or non preference to such lifestyles to have them shoved into their faces to employ, embrace, etc.

Examples:

-Gay students should have the same right to education, respect and love as any other student

-All members of society should be employable regardless of sexual identity provided they work well and are not disruptive or in your face about anything (sexual or otherwise) that upsets work place harmony.

-Schools are free to teach LGBTQ lifestyles if they want to and if a majority of parents agree. otherwise they should not be forced to.

-We should not force anyone or any group to do anything that they don't feel comfortable with. Christian or Muslim organizations should not be forced to employ LGTBQ people if such people don't support their teachings on sexual ethics. Neither should LGBTQ organizations be forced to hire religious or other people who don't support their viewpoints on sexual ethics. The same goes for everyone else. Should Apple Inc employ someone who doesn't like their products and openly promotes rival company's products? Obviously not.

Let there be mutual acceptance of everyone's choices and preferences. Then we can all get along.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

There are no sexual minorities.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Any sort of harassment and mistreatment of the LGBTQ community is wrong and should be discouraged. There is no question about that.

Good. We agree on that.

At the same time, highlighting the need to respect the LGBTQ community should not be used as a trojan horse vehicle to promote such lifestyles to school children against the wishes of parents.

Note the use of "such lifestyles" as if it's wrong or abnormal. Kind of negates the progress made on the issue, don't you think?

Being LGBTQ is completely normally and natural. Surely, it can be promoted in the same way that heterosexuality is promoted and unquestioned.

-We should not force anyone or any group to do anything that they don't feel comfortable with. Christian or Muslim organizations should not be forced to employ LGTBQ people if such people don't support their teachings on sexual ethics. Neither should LGBTQ organizations be forced to hire religious or other people who don't support their viewpoints on sexual ethics. The same goes for everyone else.

So, why not adopt the stance - I don't like that, so I don't do it, rather than I don't like that, so you can't do it?

Should Apple Inc employ someone who doesn't like their products and openly promotes rival company's products? Obviously not.Let there be mutual acceptance of everyone's choices and preferences. Then we can all get along.

Really? Get along, after attempting to divide people by setting up heterosexual and LGBTQ people as rivals?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

In light of agreeing with this article's call to stop harassment of sexual minorities I'd like to offer more examples of how this would practically work including

-LGBTQ people shouldn't be denied service by businesses or other service providers simply for their sexual identity. It's absolutely wrong to hurt others in this way.

-No business or service provider should be forced to provide service in a way that violates their principles or conscience. Confectioners, bakers etc ought to provide regular products to everyone. But shouldn't be forced to include messages they don't agree with. Eg; Promotions of LGBTQ lifestyles, political or religious messages, etc. We shouldn't force Jewish providers to bake a cake with a 'Free Palestine' message. If one service provider doesn't like or agree with your message please respect them and find another who does. Don't sue them into bankruptcy like many activists have.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/10/uk-supreme-court-backs-bakery-that-refused-to-make-gay-wedding-cake

A little mutual love and respect shown by all would bring peaceful co-existence.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

@Toasted Heretic

Note the use of "such lifestyles" as if it's wrong or abnormal. Kind of negates the progress made on the issue, don't you think?

Being LGBTQ is completely normally and natural. Surely, it can be promoted in the same way that heterosexuality is promoted and unquestioned.

There are parents and other people who feel that such sexual orientations are not natural as they don't lead to procreation or for other reasons. It's their right to have their own personal viewpoint and to not be forced to teach or have their kids taught otherwise, provided the kids are also taught to love and respect all people regardless of their sexual or other identity. That's fair. It's a free world. No malice intended,

Also, there are parents and others who have no interest in LGBTQ lifestyles and don't care to have it taught to their kids. They might also prefer their kids to learn to have children so they'll have offspring to care for them in their old age, Or they want their boys to avoid high risk sexual behavior (men with men anal sex). Again, it's a free world. Let's not force, sue etc just because people have other preferences.

So, why not adopt the stance - I don't like that, so I don't do it, rather than I don't like that, so you can't do it?

Not at all saying LGBTQ poeple can't live their chosen lifestyle. Just asking for tolerance for those who don't like it or don't want to be forced to teach it, etc. Let everyone live as they please with mutual respect.

Really? Get along, after attempting to divide people by setting up heterosexual and LGBTQ people as rivals?

No one is a rival. My point is that I agree with the article's call to non harassment of sexual minorities and that the same tolerance should be extended to those who are not interested in it. It's a two way street.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Christian or Muslim organizations should not be forced to employ LGTBQ people if such people don't support their teachings on sexual ethics

That's a very big no, how exactly are things going to improve for the LGTBQ community if we give the signal to certain religious beliefs it is okay to discriminate them and consider them sexually perverted ?

Such archaic religious beliefs don't belong in any modern society.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I think we need to get past this stupid idea that religious beliefs deserve special protections.

The right to believe in your religion is protected, and should be. The religions themselves deserve no special treatment though.

If the religious attitudes don't match the society in which they are spreading their religion requiring special protections, it simply means the religion is out of date, and out of step, neither of which mean it should get protection.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

I think we need to get past this stupid idea that religious beliefs deserve special protections.

I’ve been arguing the same thing for a long time.

My take is that the market will sort this out in western societies. Homophobia is becoming less tolerated among Christians and the more bigoted sects will see more empty pews, and most importantly, less cash.

A few timely revelations or reinterpretations will be necessary. It’s happened before.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

It's their right to have their own personal viewpoint and to not be forced to teach

It's unfortunate they think that way but I agree with that statement.

or have their kids taught otherwise,

Wrong they have to obey the law and ethics of the country they live in.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@Strangerland

I think we need to get past this stupid idea that religious beliefs deserve special protections.

While some religious groups are arguing for special 'religious freedom' protections, I am not. I'm simply calling for all people to be allowed to live, think, educate their kids, etc. they please without harassment, law suits, coercion etc.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@Mister X

Wrong they have to obey the law and ethics of the country they live in.

So, LGBTQ people should cease their lifestyle because the Muslim country they live in threatens them with the death penalty?

Rather, let's let everyone let others live as they please without harassment, law suits and coercion whether they are LGBTQ or not, or whether they want to teach it or not, etc, etc.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I am not. I'm simply calling for all people to be allowed to live, think, educate their kids, etc. they please without harassment, law suits, coercion etc.

Sorry, but people who discriminate deserve harassment. If they are in violation of the law, then they should face lawsuits. And if they aren't willingly to follow the ethics of society then they deserved to be encouraged to do so.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Is this about acceptance, or is it attempting to indoctrinate? (...) Eg; Promotions of LGBTQ lifestyles, political or religious messages, etc (...) Not at all saying LGBTQ poeple can't live their chosen lifestyle. Just asking for tolerance for those who don't like it or don't want to be forced to teach it, etc.

Lol! Come on guys, no one's trying to convert ppl into becoming gay, trans etc!!

2 ( +4 / -2 )

So, LGBTQ people should cease their lifestyle because the Muslim country they live in threatens them with the death penalty?

Fair enough. I suppose I should have said people who live in countries with ethical laws, must obey the ethical laws of the countries they live in.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@Strangerland

Fair enough. I suppose I should have said people who live in countries with ethical laws, must obey the ethical laws of the countries they live in.

What's the difference? This would still mean that LGBTQ people would have to cease their lifestyles in many countries. And probably you would be unable to hold or act out many of your ethical viewpoints in those same countries, even in Japan. That's not individual freedom and tolerance.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

This would still mean that LGBTQ people would have to cease their lifestyles in many countries.

And therefore I don't think they have an ethical obligation to follow those laws.

And probably you would be unable to hold or act out many of your ethical viewpoints in those same countries, even in Japan.

Which would be wrong.

I'm not sure how you are seeing any of this as justification for religion to discriminate.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@goldorak

Lol! Come on guys, no one's trying to convert ppl into becoming gay, trans etc!!

That's good.

But there are those who are suing and coercing others who don't want to participate, teach, promote etc. This also needs to stop.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

I think this is a great initiative.

But i have a doubt: how do you plan on resolving this issue, without changing Japanese society from it's core?

The problem in Japan is related to everyone's pressure to conform to society, to be identical and standardized. It's a society that favors the group instead of the individual, criticizing individualism.

So how are you planning to seriously address LGBT+ or other minorities discrimination issues, without changing that?

Japanese people have this conception about conformism that is taught them since childhood, in school.

Either you change the education system (and the society) or you won't be able to properly address the root of the problem, in my opinion.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Strangerland

And therefore I don't think they have an ethical obligation to follow those laws.

This would give license to harassers and discriminators to not follow ethical laws in Western nations that forbid it. You are also assuming that your version of ethics trumps other people's. Let's have tolerance for all viewpoints.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

This would give license to harassers and discriminators to not follow ethical laws in Western nations that forbid it.

I can't follow what you're saying here, between the double negatives and the ambiguity as to what "it" is referring to.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

@Strangerland

No. I don't tolerate discrimination due to faith in a vengeful sky fairy - or any other sky fairies for that matter.

These people can either learn to treat other humans with dignity and respect, or they can be treated as they deplorables they are. Because they're pathetic disgusting humans hiding their fears of that which they don't understand behind some veil of "but my deity told me to do it".

Wow, that's a strong and intolerant statement. Probably blurted in the heat of the moment. Normally you're a advocate for tolerance, so I'll give it a pass. Just please don't try to force your viewpoints on other OK?

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Does this include jobs that hire based on gender? Some places only hire specific genders for jobs. For example, esthetician salons, bars, many office jobs, some teaching jobs, construction work, clubs, and many more. Should they have to offer jobs to any gender?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

There is far more than LGBTQ being discriminated against. And every age thinks they got their discrimination right "this time".

0 ( +1 / -1 )

LGBTQ people should cease their lifestyle because the Muslim country they live in threatens them with the death penalty?

It shouldn't be that way but yes if they reside in a Muslim country which follows Sharia law I would strongly advice them to do so for their own sake.

Not because I agree with that extreme stance within the Islam but purely because it makes no sense in making a point if it will cost you your life and you know nothing will change with regards to that regime anyway.

However they can seek asylum based on humanitarian grounds in many countries around the globe to be able to express their sexual identity freely and without fear.

You are also assuming that your version of ethics trumps other people's

When I and others say that no archaic religion has the right to harass, discriminate or physically hurt people from a different sexual orientation your damn right I consider that a higher ethical value that the believers of such faith.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

People with gender dysphoria have a very high rate of suicide. Most people don't seek treatment.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@Mister X

When I and others say that no archaic religion has the right to harass, discriminate or physically hurt people from a different sexual orientation your damn right I consider that a higher ethical value that the believers of such faith.

Agreed.

Why are you bringing that up? No one is advocating for "the right to harass, discriminate or physically hurt people from a different sexual orientation" on behalf of religion.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Why are you bringing that up?

You accused another poster of thinking he has higher ethics just because he disgagrees with certain countries which force LGBTQ people to cease their lifestyle and I agree with that other poster.

No one is advocating for "the right to harass, discriminate or physically hurt people from a different sexual orientation" on behalf of religion.

I didn't say that but you specifically refered to Muslim countries who give LGBTQ the death penalty and if you believe that opposing that means I have higher ethic values I am more than glad to fit that shoe.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Mister X

It seems there has been a misunderstanding about who was talking about whom and what.

Anyway, just to be clear, I'm not advocating nor agree with religious or any other countries hurting the LGBTQ community in any way.

You accused another poster of thinking he has higher ethics just because he disgagrees with certain countries which force LGBTQ people to cease their lifestyle and I agree with that other poster.

To clarify, my 'accusation' was not concerning the other poster's ethics regarding religious nation's treatment of LGBTQ people, but rather that poster's ethics regarding LGBTQ sexuality and how society handles these matters.

My apologies to you and the other poster for any misunderstanding. All the best to you.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

My apologies to you and the other poster for any misunderstanding. All the best to you.

No problem, I wish you all the best as well.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"SOGI harassment is a matter of life. There are people among sexual minority groups who feel they don't belong anywhere, and have committed suicide (as a result)," said Gon Matsunaka, head of the group named Nakuso! SOGI hara jikkou iinkai (Let's get rid of SOGI hara! executive committee).

Uh huh.

First people claim gender minority groups.

Then they claim that sex and gender are not the same thing.

So now we have gender minority groups AND sexual minority groups!?

Please “enlighten” us.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Concerned CitizenAug. 19 04:03 pm JST

There are parents and other people who feel that such sexual orientations are not natural as they don't lead to procreation or for other reasons. It's their right to have their own personal viewpoint and to not be forced to teach or have their kids taught otherwise, provided the kids are also taught to love and respect all people regardless of their sexual or other identity. That's fair. It's a free world. No malice intended,

I'm not sure you understand that "no malice intended" sounds very hollow when you are LGBTQ and find yourself being marginalized from society, told you are unnatural, perverted, dirty, disgusting, unacceptable, and accused of indoctrinating people to a "unnatural lifestyle" merely by existing.

I don't even think I need to go into how ludicrous it is to claim that a person can be persuaded to be gay. That people actually believe that kind of nonsense ought to be a clue that this person isn't thinking clearly and is operating from ignorance. And as that is the case, then why should their view be entertained? That's like saying we should give serious consideration to people who think vaccines cause autism.

The claim is that it is not hate, but only an attempt to "express a personal view." I would argue that if the personal view being expressed is indistinguishable from hate, claiming love and respect is a direct contradiction. It's clearly a lie meant to absolve the person from responsibility for expressing a hateful view. Sorry, but that doesn't fool anyone. GLBTQ want nothing more than the right to exist without a continuous barrage of hateful rhetoric. I would suggest that when expressing "your personal view" you listen to mom's advice: if you can't say something nice, then don't say anything at all.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Please “enlighten” us.

Speak for yourself, as you were not elected to represent anyone and it seems to be you that needs enlightening.

First people claim gender minority groups. Then they claim that sex and gender are not the same thing.

Sex and gender are synonyms but not all the time. Sexual orientation is clearly separate from gender however, and sexual orientation is not a synonym for "sex" in any of its various definitions.

If a man is sexually attracted to other men, that does not mean he is a woman by gender. It does not even mean he is gay! He could be bisexual and bisexuals do not waffle between male and female gender identity.

Look man, if your psychological gender matches your biological gender, lucky you. If your sexual orientation is the majority heterosexual, then again, lucky you. You could either try and have some empathy for those less fortunate than you or you could just butt out.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

You could either try and have some empathy for those less fortunate than you or you could just butt out.

And there it is. Agree with us or don't have an opinion.

Theres nothing "less fortunate" about it. You're not a victim.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Bugle Boy of Company BToday 12:11 pm JST

And there it is. Agree with us or don't have an opinion.

Everyone is allowed an opinion, and as there is no way to stop people from forming one, this comment is nonsensical.

The real argument is to "butt out", as in, leave people alone and stop asserting that your opinion ought to be considered valid.

On a personal level, that would mean "if you can't say anything nice, then don't say anything at all", and on a national level that would mean don't expect your opinion on LGBT issues to be considered as valid when it comes to formulating laws or government polices, such as those against discrimination.

As I said, considering an argument from bigotry as valid would be like asserting to a doctor that the opinion of a parent who believes, in ignorance, that vaccines cause autism are valid and should be considered when formulating health policy at a national level.

Theres nothing "less fortunate" about it. You're not a victim.

So... people who are discriminated against, harassed, and even murdered for their sexual orientation aren't victims of criminal actions? Even though discrimination based on sexual orientation, harassment, and murder are against the law? How does that make sense?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Everyone is allowed an opinion, and as there is no way to stop people from forming one, this comment is nonsensical.

Everyone is allowed an opinion - Yes! Telling me (or anyone) to "butt out" is the same as saying "you don't get to have an opinion on this." So my comment is not nonsensical. It's highly accurate.

The real argument is to "butt out", as in, leave people alone and stop asserting that your opinion ought to be considered valid.

Basically, validity and opinion do not go together. We are all entitled to our own opinion - whether they be based on fact or not. One's opinion is not "valid" - it is an opinion.

So... people who are discriminated against, harassed, and even murdered for their sexual orientation aren't victims of criminal actions? Even though discrimination based on sexual orientation, harassment, and murder are against the law? How does that make sense?

Of course they are! I never suggested otherwise. I'm referring to something else. Read closely and try not to read bigotry into something where there is none. Norman suggested that "if your psychological gender matches your biological gender, lucky you" and that those were were not "lucky" were less fortunate. I'm saying that just because you aren't "lucky" doesn't mean you are a victim.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Bugle Boy of Company BToday 02:12 pm JST

Everyone is allowed an opinion - Yes! Telling me (or anyone) to "butt out" is the same as saying "you don't get to have an opinion on this." So my comment is not nonsensical. It's highly accurate.

No, because you are equating having an opinion to being listened to, and those things are not the same. You can have an opinion, but you can't expect people to care, to listen to it, or to take it into consideration. "Butt out" and "if you can't say something nice then don't say anything at all" merely means that you are being asked to stop asserting your opinions where they are unwanted; and if you decide to keep doing that, you are going to get negative feedback.

On the interpersonal level, an analogy would be if you walked up to someone on the street and just started harping on something - that person would, very rightly, tell you to stop and to leave them alone. You can't throw a fit and say your rights are somehow being trampled on just because people tell you they don't want to hear you thoughts on how they live your life, particularly when the opinion you are expressing is objectively wrong, offensive, and bigoted.

I would add that it has become the norm for people who express such prejudicial beliefs to be shouted down, and it is now considered highly rude and inappropriate to express such beliefs. That is particularly the case when the people you are targeting are in the intended audience. Ahem. cough. You will reap what you sow if you decide to ignore those social norms, so don't complain - no one is going to take your side, and you look like a whining baby.

Basically, validity and opinion do not go together. We are all entitled to our own opinion - whether they be based on fact or not. One's opinion is not "valid" - it is an opinion.

Validity means "the quality of being logically or factually sound; soundness or cogency." So no, every opinion is not valid. To be valid, an opinion cannot be based on ignorance, lies, or misinformation. As bigoted opinions are not factual, but based on prejudice and ignorance, they are inherently invalid.

Norman suggested that "if your psychological gender matches your biological gender, lucky you" and that those were were not "lucky" were less fortunate. I'm saying that just because you aren't "lucky" doesn't mean you are a victim.

Even if we are not going to define "victims" as people who have experienced criminal acts, then it is still true that GLBTQ can be described as victims - victims of prejudice, of societal condemnation, of insults and degradation. So there's that.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I would add that it has become the norm for people who express such prejudicial beliefs to be shouted down, and it is now considered highly rude and inappropriate to express such beliefs.

What beliefs?? That there are no sexual minorities? Hey, facts are facts. Unless you consider the fact that there are about 1.06 males for every 1 female, then female would technically be THE sexual minority. (as opposed to A sexual minority.)

What you consider to be rude and/or inappropriate is simply the denial of reality, truth and science.

The ONLY other possible "sexual minority" possible are the anomalies - and I don't mean the people who are trying to decide how they feel about themselves, but the people who are born with a bit of both sexes. But it still boils down to them being anomalies.

If you wish to define and redefine the sexes or genders or whatever you wish to label it tomorrow, then you must continue down the rabbit hole that is intersectionality and keep creating sub-categories upon sub-category until you have the ultimate level, which is the individual. And that makes us all equal.

You are free to ignore my opinions. You can tell me to "butt out" - that's your right! My point is simply that the mentality is "agree with us or shut up" and it's often enforced with violent acts.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's nice to see so much support for LGBTQ people.

I'm not entirely convinced of the sincerity from one or two, mind.

There shouldn't be any discrimination, the rights and visibility should be promoted as much as the heterosexual one is.

It's a win win situation.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites