Mark Austin reports that Otaru, site of the famous onsen lawsuit, still has a “Japanese Only” establishment, “Monika”
Posted by debito on July 7th, 2011
New novel IN APPROPRIATE by ARUDOU Debito
UPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
DEBITO.ORG PODCASTS on iTunes, subscribe free
Hi Blog. Mark Austin reports the following. In light of Otaru’s long and rather pathetic history of refusing NJ (and NJ-looking Japanese) customers entry to their bathhouses etc., one would hope that the authorities by now might be a bit more proactive in preventing this sort of thing from happening again. Used with permission of the author. Arudou Debito
////////////////////////////////////////////
From: Mark Austin
Subject: Re: From Otaru tourism association
Date: June 30, 2011 4:29:24 AM GMT+09:00
To: annai@otaru.gr.jp
Cc: XXXXXXXX@otaru.gr.jp
Dear XXXX-san,
Thanks very much for your mail.
I very much appreciate your kind attention to the matter of my being denied entry to a business establishment in Otaru simply because I’m not Japanese.
Thank you for taking my complaint seriously.
Of course, I fully understand that the food bar Monika may have had trouble with foreigners in the past. I’ve heard that Russian sailors in Otaru sometimes get drunk and behave badly.
I must say that I truly sympathize with the situation of Monika and other eating/drinking establishments in Otaru that have had trouble with non-Japanese people.
However, I strongly feel that banning all foreigners is not the way to solve any problems that Otaru businesses have with non-Japanese people.
As for myself, I am a British citizen who has permanent residency in Japan. I moved to this country in 1990. I now work in Bangalore, India, as a visiting professor at a journalism school, but my home is Japan. I visited Otaru on Monday to give a lecture at Otaru University of Commerce.
On Monday evening, after I’d visited the onsen at the Dormy Inn, where I was staying, I asked a receptionist at the hotel if she could recommend a pub or bar where I could have a beer and something to eat. She pointed me in the direction of the area west of the railway. I walked there and found loads of “snack” bars, which I didn’t want to enter. Then I found Monika [I think this is the place -- Ed] and was told by a Mr. XXXXX that I wasn’t welcome there.
I pointed out to Mr. XXXXX (in Japanese) that his refusal to serve me constituted racial discrimination (I used the phrase “jinshu sabetsu”) and he agreed that it was, and defended this by merely saying, “Ma, sho ga nai.”
After about 10 minutes, I gave up (politely) arguing with Mr. XXXXX and left.
I felt very hurt, angry and frustrated.
I hope you’ll take a look at this United Nations report on racial discrimination in Japan, which finds that the Japanese government is not living up to its promises to stop Japanese businesses discriminating against foreigners.
The rude treatment given to me on Monday night in Otaru would be unthinkable in my country, or other European countries, or the United States, and, I guess, most other democracies in the world that I’ve visited.
As an employee of the Otaru Tourism Association, I’m sure you’ll agree that your job description is to try to boost the local economy as much as possible by advertising the many attractions of Otaru, a beautiful city with a rich history in which foreigners played an important part from the late 19th century, to Japanese and non-Japanese people alike. In Otaru, foreigners (residents and tourists) and Japanese spend the same currency–yen. Is it asking too much that we be treated the same, as far as possible?
I should tell you that I have a huge admiration and respect for Japan, the country where I’ve lived almost half my life very happily. One thing I don’t like about Japan, however, is its thinking that it is somehow “exceptional”–that normal rules that apply everywhere else in the world don’t apply here. According to this thinking, Japan is “in” the world, but not “of” the world.
If pubs, restaurants and bars in Otaru (and elsewhere in Japan) have problems with foreigners, here’s what they should do:
1 Call the police.
2 Film and photograph the troublemakers (using cell phones or CCTV).
3 Ban individual troublemakers.
4 Ask the local government to contact the foreign ministry of the troublemakers’ country, requesting that foreign ministry to advise its citizens how to behave properly in Japan (the British Foreign Ministry regularly issues such advisories to British citizens traveling abroad; I don’t know if the foreign ministries of China or Russia, two countries whose citizens regularly visit Otaru, do so).
5 Post notices in various languages giving advice on acceptable/unacceptable behavior (that is now standard with onsen and sento, which is good).
Thanks again, XXXX-san, for your kind attention to my complaint. I would like to say, respectfully, that I expect some sort of concrete resolution to this problem (in other words, not just a vague promise of “We’re sorry, and we’ll try to improve the situation”), and I’ll be very happy to help you achieve that result in any way I can.
Best regards,
Mark Austin
Visiting Professor
Indian Institute of Journalism & New Media
Bangalore, India
ENDS
July 7th, 2011 at 9:27 am
Why would they block a foriegner from entering an eating establishment? Thats just weird.
– It happens.
July 7th, 2011 at 10:39 am
This “Japanese only” problem is far from over…and government are not even slightly concerned by it.
I once complained at a bar that had a “Japanese Only” sign in Yokosuka, Kanagawa. Next week the sign said “Members only” (in English)… sigh.
I kind of despair and lose motivation battling with these places because even though in principle it is outrageous, after knowing about the attitude of the owner I cant imagine anyone would want to go there or give them money. I wish they would put the sign in Japanese though, just to make it extra clear to the Japanese when they are entering a racist establishment.
July 7th, 2011 at 11:39 am
You’ve gotta love the fact that they’ve got an English language web page
http://r.gnavi.co.jp/h114400/lang/en/
– I assume it’s the same place.
July 7th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Ironically, the website for the restaurant says the place serves “mukokuseki food.” So the food can be from anywhere, but the customers can’t. The restaurant’s website has a place for comments and reviews, and that may be a great place to leave polite and public comments as to the practice of discrimination.
July 7th, 2011 at 1:58 pm
The website also says they have English-speaking staff available! I guess so they can tell gaijin would-be customers to shove off…
July 7th, 2011 at 4:58 pm
The fact that the restaurant has an English language web page and Mark’s experience somehow don’t square. I wonder, if the reported conversation took place entirely in Japanese, if Mr XXXXX assumed that Mark was Russian? Not that that excuses anything.
– Once again, are we starting to give the benefit of the doubt to the perpetrator, not the victim? Why do so many people actively seek to doubt that racial discrimination happens in Japan? We did a whole lawsuit for half a decade to prove without question or doubt that it does. And I can vouch for Mark’s credentials — I’ve known him for years as a reporter for the Daily Yomiuri. So if he says it happened, I fully believe it happened.
July 7th, 2011 at 6:31 pm
@Debito
Absolutely not, There’s no doubt for him to be goven the benefit of. He’s a racist idiot. I’m just trying to make sense of the fact that the place has an English website but refused Mark service. And I absoutely trust Mark’s story; I don’t see any suggestion in what I wrote that implies otherwise.
– You doubted if “the reported conversation took place entirely in Japanese”. Anyway, onward with the discussion.
July 7th, 2011 at 6:52 pm
The benefit of doubt is always given to the perpetrator, not the victim. That is called presumed innocence.
July 7th, 2011 at 8:35 pm
“The benefit of doubt is always given to the perpetrator, not the victim. That is called presumed innocence.”
This is not a court of law, HO.
July 8th, 2011 at 1:16 am
An English website! Oh good, this will make it easier for me to find the contact info and call to complain.
If a few of us just call up along the lines of “Sumimasen ga, gaikokujin wa fuka desu ka? Naze deshou ka? Sore wa jinshuu sabetsu desu ne..” it might humiliate or shame them into rethinking their policy.
At the very least, it might wind them up. Don`t get mad, get even.
At the same time, the usual “take a photo and name and shame” tactic would be useful.
Harsh but fair.
July 8th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
My guess is that the English translation is done automatically by the company Gourmet Navigator, which runs that website, not by the restaurant itself.
The restaurant may not even be aware that its website is available in English.
July 8th, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Hi all,
The Monika in question with the English-language website and English-speaking staff is indeed the one that turned me away! How weird…
@Joe, the conversation was wholly in Japanese (though my Japanese leaves much to be desired).
July 8th, 2011 at 2:35 pm
A racially discriminatory restaurant called “Monika” ? Might I suggest instead the “Kokuryuu Cafe” ?
There was a time when Japan took pride in its racism; to think we’ve gone from Master Race Maestros like Hideaki Tojo to passive-aggressive pansies running quaint eateries…maybe Mr. Sheftall was onto something.
Kidding(?) aside, if it’s true that the exclusory policy is an excercise in convenience, then obviously it would disappear in short order should it become an inconvenience. I wonder if it is possible to overload them with paperwork or something time and resource consuming. Or perhaps some NJ residents of Otaru could add to the irony: who wouldn’t love to see a Taiyaki stand set up shop outside, openly refusing business to Japanese customers? Now there’s a tourist attraction!
July 9th, 2011 at 9:43 am
Debito, do you live in or close to this area? Is there anyway you could go there and inquire about the situation?
– Yes I do. But another friend is currently making inquiries. And any Debito.org Reader should feel free to telephone them and ask what happened. That includes you, beneaththewheel. Stand up for your (collective) rights. Don’t always leave it up to me.