The recent article (see below for the full text) by Bruce Wallace about "'Sambo' returns to bookracks in Japan" shows what is wrong and hasn't changed about American journalism when covering other countries. The writer is only half right and continues reiterate half-truths about Japan without putting the situation into a global context.
In 1988, the Japanese version of Little Black Sambo, "Chibikuro Sambo," was taken off the shelves. One of the groups protesting Japan and Japanese attitudes towards black people was the Congressional Black Caucus . They protested the "inflammatory and derisive" anti-black prejudices they saw in Japan and were threatening to organize a boycott of Japanese products.
Sanrio was criticized for having cute black dolls. It didn't help that Prime Minister Nakasone made a comment about blacks and their financial problems.
Yet there were places where you could still buy cutesy, black dolls and the book "Little Black Sambo."
In the spring of 1989, you could still buy the book in Japan. I bought a copy of "Little Black Sambo" in a store called Kinokuniya in Shinjuku, Tokyo. At that time in Japan, you could buy the British publication of "Little Black Sambo" but not the Japanese version. In the United Kingdom, the place where the author was born (Helen Bannerman was Scottish), you could and can still buy the book.
In the spring of 1989, a high profile black American was passing out golliwog dolls in Paris. In April of 1989, you could see the American issue of Time magazine with an article on this man, Patrick Kelly. In Japan, you could buy the American version as well as the international version. The difference? The international English version had an image the American version decided not to carry—a model wearing a dress decorated with golliwog faces.
A journalist should have asked: Why was the Congressional Black Caucus focusing on Japan and not the United Kingdom as well? Why should a book be banned due to outside pressure from Americans and yet still be available in America and other English speaking countries?
Why was it okay for the fashionable Europeans and Americans to partake in Patrick Kelly's silliness and not a Japanese manufacturer? Why was it okay for the British to advertise Kia Ora with a little black hobo boy or Robinson's jam to have a golliwog logo? These were all in place in the UK in 1989. After all, Maggie Thatcher made her famous "swamping" comment in 1978. That attitude hadn't quite died down.
Yet why didn't the Americans target the UK as well as Japan?
Don't more Americans go to the UK than Japan? Don't more Americans speak and read English than Japanese? This was an easy one. More American journalists read English than Japanese. Most Japanese journalists understand at last one other language.
.jpg?t=20120209092158)
Article comments
1 - Tony
have no idea how you ascertained that "Most Japanese journalists understand at last one other language."
At least one other language? I work as a journalist in Tokyo and its relatively rare to find any Japanese journalist who speaks English.
Also, you can't be seriously suggesting that the popularity of curry in Japan says anything significant about Japanese peoples attitudes to South Asians?
I doubt this man would agree: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20030116b9.htm
Anyway, the curry eaten in Japan isn't exactly authentic anyway. It came via England not India.
2 - Nancy
I had that book when I was a kid, and I always thought Sambo was pretty gutsy & smart, tricking the tigers like that. How did it ever morph into being racist? Also, as mentioned above, 'Sambo' was Indian. I distinctly remember the kid wearing a turban. So why are blacks upset? How does it involve them?
3 - Tim
Nancy asked: "How did it ever morph into being racist? Also, as mentioned above, 'Sambo' was Indian. I distinctly remember the kid wearing a turban. So why are blacks upset? How does it involve them?"
I have no idea what the author originally intended, but 'Sambo' does not sound like an Indian name to me. Correct me if it is in fact a common Indian name. Similarly "black" is not an adjective that I have heard used to describe people of Indian descent. Have you? We're not talking about "Little Brown Vijay" here, it's "Little Black Sambo." If you can't see why "blacks" (note: you wrote "blacks") would think it refers to them, there's not much hope for you.
Then there's the illustrations. The ones I've seen don't seem to be portraying an Indian boy.
Regarding the original article: Who exactly was demanding the Japanese to "ban" the book, or suggesting that different rules apply to the Japanese? Sounds like a strawman to me. What specifically was the verbatim criticism of Japan by the Congressional Black Caucus that is being criticised here?
4 - SFC SKI
Well, Tim, I think our Indian commenters can better explain this, but I have heard Indians refer to skin color as black at times, and I have read that there is some level of discrimination regarding skin tone amongst Indians.
5 - Purple Tigress
1. Regarding "Most Japanese journalists understand at least one other language." Excusing the typo (last instead of least), one can understand a language without being able to speak it since language involves several aspects of comprehension: listening comprehension, reading comprehension and ability to speak. The Japanese educational system requires students to learn English before high school graduation. In college, undergrads in Japan are expected to be able to do research in at least one foreign language. Japan is not the only country with these practices. Assuming that journalists graduated from high school means that they had to study at least one foreign language. As a journalist in Japan, Tony, you should be aware of that. Also as a journalist, you should be aware that the meaning of the word speak is different than the meaning of the word understand. I can understand Spanish when I read it and sometimes when I hear it, but I cannot speak Spanish. Most Japanese can read some English. Most Americans cannot read Japanese.
2. There is such a thing as fallacy of anecdotal evidence. The Asian Indian you reference in an article won a court case based on discrimination. We do not know if this was often his experience or if it was one incident in isolation. For this reason, I would not assume to speak for this man and, as a journalist, you should not either with such scanty evidence to go on. That is really poor argumentation and even poorer judgment as a journalist.
3. The assumption that you make that the Japanese were introduced to curry by the British is interesting and I understand there is some controversy about the origin of curry. I prefer to believe that noodles originated in China and curry in India. While Japan was closed to the British prior to Commodore Perry's opening of Japan by force, it was not closed to China, Korea, Taiwan or the Dutch. Some have suggested that the Chinese introduced curry to India. In any case, Buddhism originated in India. Buddhist monks went to China and India on pilgrimage. India is close to Japan, closer than the UK and closer than America.
4. The infiltration of certain cuisines into a country suggests the influx of those peoples. It is easier to get sushi in Los Angeles than Nebraska. I, of course, was referring to Indian curry and not Japanese curry and I don't really like British food. So I don't believe the curry I was referencing was by way of England. The restaurants I went to in Japan were managed by Asian Indians. There were other Japanese eating there. I went to eat with Japanese. So I imagine that Asian Indians also fill other positions and might be available for a journalist to consult if that journalist doesn't want to speak to the embassy. The American journalist might have even tried to speak with an Asian Indian journalist. This was not done.
5. The origin of Sambo as the name used by the original author is unclear. She might have been making up a name since many Indian names begin with the prefix Sam. To my knowledge she did not speak an Indian dialect.
6. How did Sambo become racist? When the story was brought to America, different illustrations were used. These illustrations were more like the stereotypical racist image: pickaninny, golliwog and black mammy. This was essentially an American event and an American problem. This is not to say that I know that the author was or was not racist nor that I believe that the British in India were not racist because it is clear that they were. This is my point. We are talking about an American problem as if it were a Japanese problem and as if this was the problem of linked to the book from the beginning. I do not know if the edition of Little Black Sambo in Japanese was based on the original. It is a mistake for Americans to believe that the British experience just as British English is the same. It is not.
7. Are Asian Indians black? Yes, depending upon what English dialect is being used. Black is used to refer to Africans in America, but Americans often forget that Arabs are also Africans. Similarly, when Americans refer to Asians, they often mean East Asians and this is the group they mean when they refer to yellow races. However, this manner of classification also neglects Asian Indians as well as other cultures and nationalities. In the UK, black refers to people from Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. See Wikipedia and novels about India written by the British for further reference.
8. As for looking up the verbatim criticism, you'll have to do that homework for yourself. I am criticizing the sloppy journalism and the continued paternalistic view of Americans and American journalists. Remember that this was the same time period that a Japanese man was killed because he was a translator for Salman Rushdie's controversial book. So why was it PC to support the continued availability of Rushdie's book and yet a children's book might be banned? Ask instead, why was Japan pressured to remove that book and not England, the point of origin? And why was the book not banned in the US as well? Those are really the more important questions that were not asked by journalists then, was not asked by the journalist in the article referenced and needs to be asked and pondered if we are to learn how to be international citizens in a peaceful world.
Why shouldn't the Japanese have be able to buy "Little Black Sambo" in Japanese just as the Americans and British can buy it in English?
6 - Nick Jones
"Similarly "black" is not an adjective that I have heard used to describe people of Indian descent."
In one of Salman Rushdie's novels (I think Midnight's Children), a woman is pitied as a "blackie" by the lighter-hued members of her family.
7 - Dave Nalle
I've met Bengalis and other Indians who have skin as black or blacker than most African Americans. The shade is slightly different, more grey and less brown, but certainly black enough to explain 'Little Black Sambo'.
I also have to point out that Sambo has to deal with tigers and tigers live in Asia, not Africa, so just a tiny bit of logic makes it clear where he's from.
Dave
8 - Tim
Points taken, but:
1) Has anyone actually asked the Japanese G to "ban" the book? There's a difference between advocating a boycott and expressing displeasure/criticism and asking for a formal ban.
2) If a US or British publishing company started printing new copies, particularly with the illustrations in the current Japanese version, I'm sure they would be subject to the same level of criticism.
3) When is the last time any US or British publishing companies printed new copies of the book? When was the last time with illustrations of the sort that appear in the Japanese version?
4) Its a top 5 bestseller in Japan. Isn't there a big difference between "its possible to buy it on the Internet" and "its a bestseller"?
Dave:
Maybe the author didn't know that there are no tigers in Africa, or didn't think it important? It seems more likely to me as the possiblity that "Black Sambo" was meant to be Indian.
9 - Dave Nalle
>>Maybe the author didn't know that there are no tigers in Africa, or didn't think it important? It seems more likely to me as the possiblity that "Black Sambo" was meant to be Indian. <<
Except that the author is on record as having set the story in India, and the character was originally depicted with a turban and rather indian looking features.
Here's an early Golden Books version of the story which shows an indian-looking character.
http://www.oldphoneman.com/images/Sambo.jpg
Here's the original story, complete with the original illos, which do look very African, although if you read and look closely the references and context are all Indian.
http://www.sterlingtimes.co.uk/sambo.htm
The key thing to note about the story is that even though the character is black skinned, it's a very positive portrayal of both the character and his family. They aren't poor, they aren't stupid, they aren't any kind of negative stereotype. They seem to be well off and kind of clever. If anything Sambo seems like a positive role model. Why is he so reviled?
Hey, and whatever happened to the Sambo's Restaurant chain anyway? I bet their promotional goodies sell for a pretty penny these days.
Dave
10 - Info
For answers (schematic subject data): Hateful Things (origins of racist imagery)
Origins of Jim Crow (Racial cast systems enacted following the end of the American civil war, and slavery)
The Picaninny Caricature (Propaganda used to support the psychological component of the Jim Crow system)
11 - STM
What a waste of energy. We'd all be better off getting them to stop killing whales and debunking their nonsense argument that whale is a traditional food.
And stopping them from bribing such giants of international affairs as landlocked minnows Burkina Faso and Burundi onto the International Whaling Commission to increase Japan's bloc of pro-whaling votes.
Only a few small coastal communities ate whale prior to the end of WWII, when the occupying Allied forces encouraged them to eat it as a means of supplementing their meagre protein intake.
Seriously, I'm less concerned about a book that's available all over the world - and trying to ban it really is the height of political correctness gone bananas - than I am about the idea that to study the whale, you have to fuc...g eat it.
My suggestion is forget the book, and lobby instead for the harpooning of Japanese whaling vessels in the South Pacific and Southern Oceans.
12 - Purple Tigress
You might have missed the point that it's not only the Japanese that are killing whales. Yet if you choose only to target Japan in your criticism, then aren't you displaying a paternalistic attitude?
The other nations are, after all, European. You don't suggest harpooning their ships. Why not?
13 - STM
Purple Tigress: The Norwegians and a few of the other scandinavian countries do have a genuine cultural basis for eating whale meat ... but they harvest on a very limited basis.
Japan, however, which has a very limited cultural claim, is constantly pushing for an increase in the quota. These increases are substantial and justified on the basis of "scientific study" (Mmm, what 2 out of every 10 Japanese says whale is nice to eat?).
The Japanese government lies, is arrogant in its disdain for those who don't want "culling" ... and as is usual, doesn't want to listen to any view that is different to its own. It's also a myth that Japanese people like eating whale. Most don't.
I live in Australia ... the last thing we want is giant Japanese factory ships coming down here and killing whales that have taken years to come back to proper breeding colonies in the south pacific and the southern ocean.
Thanks to whaling, there were once hardly any whales migrating up the east coast of Australia to breed; now you can stand on any headland on the east coast and watch them in good numbers heading north towards Hervey Bay in Queensland and back again with their young. It's beautiful that an international whaling ban has allowed these magnificent creatures to return from the brink of extinction. Yes, extinction.
So, no, I'm not being paternalistic. I'm being fair-dinkum, as we say in Australia.
And I'm still up for the harpooning. Or sinking.
14 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Ummm...
PT, I enjoyed your article and appreciate the point you make in it, as well as the implied point that "all" whites (not really all, but a significant number of Archie Bunker or "white man's burden" types in the English speaking world) view dark skinned peoples as black - and inferior.
And I also appreciate that the feces that whites do not smell in themselves, they make a big stink about in others.
But, and please do not take this the wrong way, I've also read about the racism in Japan, Korea and Vietnam, particularly towards folks with blonde hair and blue eyes, and how, while Japanese are most courteous hosts to foreigners, a child of white and Asian parents can be made miserable in Japan to a far greater extent than this would be true in America, which is also infested with racism.
Finally, I would suggest that it is not the job of the mainstream media to inform, but rather to entertain, and while an informed populace is the best defense against tyranny, the goal of the mainstrea media is primarily to keep people ignorant in many ways, so that those who exploit the culture in question can continue to do so unhindered.
In that sense, bloggers are very subversive element in the culture...
15 - Purple Tigress
Japan also has a long tradition of whaling. This is an excuse, just as it is an excuse for Norway and Iceland. Yet you find this excuse OK for Scandinavian countries.
The first mention of whaling among the Japanese is in 712 in the Kojiki.
Japan has imported meat from Norway, so just how limited is Norway's whaling? Norway announced this year that it plans to increase its catch. Norway broke the global moratorium on commercial whaling in 1993.
Norway did not begin Minke whaling in 1930.
The problem with Americans protesting Japanese whaling is that American policies also threaten domestic endangered species, just not the whale. Look at the discussion over drilling for oil in Alaska.
Journalists are supposed to give a fair representation of the facts, however, they are often ignorant of the facts and biased by racism or nationalism.
There is no doubt that Japanese are like Americans in that they are racist. Why should be expect them to be different? Usually the great surprise comes from journalists who aren't used to being treated as a minority or can't believe that Asians feel they can tell the difference between themselves and other Asians.
Bloggers are not always journalists and are often not trained or well educated and also do not feel governed by laws of slander and libel.
If you had gone to journalism school or read essays by Pulitzer prize winning journalists you would not have written that their job is to entertain and not all journalists work for the mainstream media. Yet even the mainstream media can break important stories that challenge the government, such as the atrocities in Iraq.
Bloggers are not necessarily any better than the mainstream media because in many cases bloggers also seek to entertain or attract attention.
16 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
PT,
I have to assume your comments about whaling in the first 5 paragraghs of your own comment #15 are directed to the Aussie who wrote comment #13, so I won't address them.
You are right, I did not go to journalism school. Therefore the heaps of propaganda about journalism supposedly being objective did not infest my brain.
My degree is in public administration and political science. I studied law for a year, a place where you learn that anything you can grab is negotiable. I occasionally get a copy of "Quill" from a friend of mine who did work for the mainstream media (Columbia Broadcasting System) and saw the change from news organization to kitchy infotainment - not in learned articles but in fear, firings and pink slips by a power hungry and sadistic bastard of a CEO.
I grew up reading the New York Times from fourth grade onwards and used to think I was something special because I read THE paper of record, while my mother contented herself with the NY Post (when it was an afternoon paper, it gave more up to date information on our investments, and one of the columnists was once her boss in the welfare department in NY) and most folks in New York read the Daily News - especially after the Mirror, Herald Tribune and World Telegraph & Sun folded after a strike.
In the early 1970's I discovered just how much THE paper of record distorted the news...
You are right in that many bloggers write to entertain, and this on-line magazine, which has its links and origins in blogging, is primarily about entertainment.
That does not change the fact that bloggers have called bullshit on the mainstream media and forced them to do their work, instead of sit in a bar and bitch, which is what many foreign reporters do (I can't comment about editors, I don't know enough), or in this neck of the woods, play toady to the Arabs in order to stay alive. After all, those distorted photos at Reuters were discovered by "Little Green Footballs" which throws hard to catch passes at an allegedly objective media here.
As for racism, my point was to be careful who you throw the charge at; it can thrown back at you with equal vehemence - something that I will not do.
17 - Nancy
I found my book. Obviously not the same illustrations as the ones that seem to represent golliwogs or pickaninnies, etc. The kid is brown, and he's wearing a turban. His features are not exaggerated.
While re-reading Kipling's "Kim" recently, I noticed a passage in the story where (in the scenes where Kim has been captured by his late father's regiment, and is interned at the camp under the eye of a British drummer boy) the drummer boy in question refers to all [Indian] natives as "niggers"; additionally, in several other passages of the book, native Indians are referred to as "black". So it would seem that these kinds of ugly terms are not restricted to the US but were fairly common useage in British India of the Raj as well, which explains the book's title.
But I still think it's not a derogatory story. He's a brave kid & outsmarts those tigers.
18 - Purple Tigress
I think you haven't read the history of the journalism and alternative media.
People have been calling BS since before bloggers and quite frankly bloggers have been found to be full of BS.
Most journalism schools have a course in ethics and most journalism organizations have ethnics in their rules and constitution. Most journalism schools also have a course in law and media.
I would guess that most bloggers have taken neither an ethics nor a media law course.
I think there were plenty of people who have noted that newspapers like the NY Times did not accurately portray many events. Some of this was because of the composition of the newsroom--predominately white male, middle class, Protestant. This is also something covered in a history of journalism course. Copy editing courses also cover race relations.
The world is much more varied than WASP. The news media is more varied than the ones you claim to follow.
Further, you also can't forget that there is a balance between the business end of the media and the news end. The publisher and the top editors can set the standards, but also the writers themselves have a responsibility as well.
Bloggers are not the salvation of the world. Their news isn't always from good sources. The Internet is full of urban legends. Blogs are full of slander and unsubstantiated statements. There is a world of conspiracy theorists. I spend a lot more time on the Internet than most people.
Perhaps the reason reporters sit and bitch is because the American culture doesn't value bilingual education as much as other countries. Most foreign journalists speak at least one foreign language and usually can do research in more.
That does mean that the news most reporters get on foreign assignment is second-hand and interpreters, even if they are trying, can't always be depended upon to give the correct interpretation. I witness such a breakdown in communication which only the bilingual reporters caught--something readily apparent the next day in the newspapers. The late Edward Said wrote about it in his book "The Covering of Islam."
I also thought that I should have noted how Scandinavian countries were referenced when in fact, only Norway continued to whale. Finland, Denmark and Sweden do not whale.
Yet we don't reference Asia or East Asia, we know it is Japan when we talk about whaling in the US. We are less clear about Norway being the only Scandinavian country if we remember at all.
The coverage differs in other countries in comparison with the US and because I can do research in more than one language, this bias becomes readily apparent. The facts are open to the reporters and their agencies, however, there are choices made. Some of these choices alienate people in other countries.
As Nancy noted, the usage of the term black in English differs from British English and American English. In relation to Japan, the edition they have is referencing another Asian.
I've also read a sociological analysis of the story "Kim." It is considered by some as racist and proof of the superior abilities of Caucasians, or specifically, the English. The Hollywood movie, "Gunga Din" was banned by the Indian government as racist imperialistic propaganda and yet we see similar themes in Indiana Jones. The infamous, Los Angeles-based Frank Chin takes on Gunga Din as a symbol of what a good Asian should be like in the eyes of white racist America.
In general, Rudyard Kipling has fallen from grace due to the rise of ethnic Asian voices. He is, however, well regarded by at least one white supremicist group in America.
Because the Japanese do not have the same baggage as Americans, why should we as Americans expect them to have the same interpretation? Why must we insist on judging things from our own limited American experience? And if the book is bad for the Japanese, it is just as bad for the English and the French and we should attempt to ban it there as well.
If anyone should be protesting in Japan, it should have been the Asian Indians. Being bilingual and wandering between two-three different communities, I was witness to an American bias and something of what makes the stereotype of the ugly American.
19 - STM
Purple Tigress: Perhaps you should have read my post in full. What I said is this: Japan has a limited cultural basis for whaling (some small coastal communities engaged in it for food). It was introduced on a large scale in Japan after WWII ... to augment the meagre protein intake of war-ravaged Japan.
It is a baby-boomer thing. To my mind, something that goes back a mere 60 years doesn't constitute a genuine basis for a claim to cultural need.
Also, I'm Australian, not American. The Norwegians have a genuine cultural claim to whaling, as does Iceland. However, Norwegians are tailing off their whaling operations, understanding that the eating of whale is no longer regarded as "cool", to quote one, while Japan seeks to upgrade them to commercial levels.
But it's the bullsh.t I find most offensive: "We're only doing scientific research (but we'll use giant factory ships to do it and eat we'll them anyway)."
Once Japan started talking about harvesting humpbacks, which have taken 30 years to return to populations that have taken them off the endangered list, it lost me as a friend.
It's just my personal little thing, and probably makes no difference to Japan's GNP, but I don't buy any Japanese products, and nor do many other Australians and only for this reason.
Whaling is fine on a limited basis for nations that have a genuine cultural basis for doing so.
Japan doesn't ... it's purely about putting an oddity dish on the table in Tokyo.
Most Japanese don't even like eating it. And with all due respect, as I don't dislike Japanese personally, how you can think my view is about paternalism is beyond me.
20 - Thomas
Just so people here can know
due to the large African population currently present in the UK, the colour of the South Asian community's skin is referred to as "BROWN", not as black, because it makes more sense for Africans to be Black.
So basically, the British dialect regarding this matter is the same as the American dialect.
21 - S.T.M
Yes, of course - now I understand ... just as it makes sense for West Indian cricketers to be wearing their "whites" when they play in international Test matches.
Sadly, however, the Japanese don't play cricket. And Sambo's still an offensive term. Just not anywhere near as offensive as the killing of whales for "research" ... what do they do, the Japanese, BTW, in terms of research? Poke 'em with chopsticks?
22 - Purple Tigress
Someone certainly likes stereotypes. Japan has a national cricket team. The sport is offered at 10 of Tokyo's universities.
You might also try to remember that the killing of whales by Europeans is just as offensive, even if Americans tend to target the Japanese--not the Asians, the Japanese. Those European nations would be Norway and Greenland. Norway hopes to take its quota of 1052 this year. I don't think this can be called a limited basis. In 2005, Japan took 1,238. So if Japan only took in 1000 whales, it would be OK like the Norwegians? The Japanese tradition is very old, mentioned in the Kojiki.
BTW, the reason Japan was opened by the West was because of American whaling interests initially. Americans wanted another port. Before that, the Japanese did not have ships to course the seas. Those were things that they learned from England and America.
Yet this is really off the original topic which was how Americans and Japanese consider a children's book. Instead, the topic of whaling has been repeatedly raised with European practices being excused. If only we could get the Japanese to stop whaling then maybe Norway could again dominate like in 1912 when they dominated most of the world's whaling.
I don't really see any reason for whaling, even in the name of tradition, any tradition. The Norwegians are no better than the Japanese, they are just less targeted for criticism by Americans and apparently also Australians. That's very similar to the matter of "Little Black Sambo."
As for it making more sense for Africans to be black, IMHO it makes little sense at all. There are very light-skinned people in Africa (Arab) and Asia (Persian) and very dark-skinned people in India and Thailand. The controversy in the musical "South Pacific" was about whether the dark-skinned Pacific Islanders weren't black.
23 - S.T.M
PT wrote: "Someone certainly likes stereotypes. Japan has a national cricket team. The sport is offered at 10 of Tokyo's universities."
Well, I'll just say there's cricket and there's Cricket with a capital C. Nevertheless, if this is true, it can only be a good thing.
I can attest that the Japanese have certainly picked up the ball and run with it (if you'll pardon the pun) with their love of rugby - which, along with cricket, is one of the great civilising influences the English have given the world. Some people might argue they're the only ones, but I digress.
Japanese rugby tends to be very fast and is exciting to watch, with the ball moved wide very quickly through the backline and again in close through very mobile forwards. The game between the US and Japan in the last rugby world cup was one of the highlights of the tournament, and the mostly Australian crowd was just about split down the middle in its support of the two teams ...
As for cricket, I would have thought the need for patience, the requirement to play with the bat for long periods of time without flinching, and the subtle nuances and tactics would suit the Japanese character very well.
I realise that is stereotyping, but it's probably also true.
As for the whale issue: I am a surfer and I love seeing them in the water. I have just been up on the far north coast where they are currently passing on the way back to the Antarctic from the warm waters of Hervey Bay in Queensland. The two main species in our waters, the southern right and the humpback, are truly magnificent creatures and need a voice to protect them, as they can't do it themselves.
Their numbers are just now getting back to manageable levels from the brink of extinction.
We all have different views PT on what constitutes stereotyping and paternalism.