What's new

Welcome to Japan Reference (JREF) - the community for all Things Japanese.

Join Today! It is fast, simple, and FREE!

Tokyo: eateries finally smoke-free

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
This right here is a pretty classic straw man. You're misrepresenting the anti-smoking argument

Read your meme again. It said misrepresenting "someone's" argument, NOT "the" (general/popular) argument. I also did not misrepresent it. I said "people who act like", NOT believe. Its up to the reader to decide if what they are hearing does not seem to be taking those things into account because that is certainly what it seems like to me. And if they are not taking things into account, how is that a misrepresentation of their argument??

and projecting a desire to hate on and oppress subgroups for kicks... because it's out of fashion to be racist or homophobic? Seriously dude, what the heck.

I don't think I will be able to find a source to explain the psychological source of taboo. However, this will perhaps enlighten you to some basic links between them.

"Changing social customs and standards also create new taboos, such as bans on slavery; extension of the pedophilia taboo to ephebophilia;[21] prohibitions on alcohol, tobacco, or psychopharmaceutical consumption (particularly among pregnant women); and the employment of politically correct euphemisms – at times quite unsuccessfully – to mitigate various alleged forms of discrimination. "


It might surprise you to know that I don't write for wiki and it was not me that put sexual taboo in the same paragraph as tobacco taboo. And a general understanding of taboo is a key reason that sex prohibition and tobacco prohibition analogy works.

And while I don't think I can find a source that will explain that the common thread in my mind is people trying to get a superiority kick, that is the single best explanation I have for the coming and going of taboo and their presence in all human societies. The goings of taboo sure makes them seem generally technically/physically unnecessary, so what other explanation is there? Well, I guess there are many psychological explanations, but mine is the desire to feel superiority in the self. Others speak of "social order" but what is the most basic social order? I would say its hierarchy or, who is superior to another. Even wolves practice that.

I find all your shredding of my analogies just ignorant of the use of analogies. Any analogy has a dozen reasons why its not a perfect match of comparison. Anyone could dismiss any analogy by the examples you have laid out. Your criticism of the differences in all my analogies pretty much means the only way for you to be satisfied with an analogy is to compare a thing with itself.

How is my challenge any more ridiculous

I explained that.....cigarettes are not directly important to ME. Only attacks on freedom are important to me. Thus, you can more fairly expect me to cough up extreme details off the top of my head about one but not the other.

I personally wish the damn things were never invented.
 
Last edited:

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Sure, life is risk, but you don't have a right to take risks for anyone else.

We may as well ban cars and baseball then since cars and baseballs injure innocent bystanders all the time.

My personal favorite would be to ban smokestacks though, the REAL cancer sticks.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
you seem determined to play devil's advocate for any number of unpopular opinions.

Try and remember this and apply it when dealing with me ALWAYS; my thing is personal freedom. I absolutely hate individuals that posture and scramble for excuses to obstruct the personal freedom of others, and I see many out there. I don't have any special desire to play Devil's advocate. I just try to see things from all sides before deciding and my decision will be largely based on if there is any way one person can enjoy their personal freedom while not treading on the personal freedom of another...or at least...I try to find a balance between them.

And popularity is nothing but a fetid garbage heap to me. I have zero interest in if an opinion is popular or not...or I am...or you are. But popular notions are not controversial, so who is even bringing them to the table for discussion? MYOB is my motto but most threads are about anything BUT people minding their own business and liking it. People love to meddle and spread rumors. I hate both intensely!
 
Last edited:

mdchachi

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Messages
3,837
Reaction score
1,237
We may as well ban cars and baseball then since cars and baseballs injure innocent bystanders all the time.

My personal favorite would be to ban smokestacks though, the REAL cancer sticks.
This is the least persuasive thing you've said so far. I'm not up on my fallacies. Are these strawmen?
In any case, in all of these examples you cite, they have all been made safer over the years. MLB has put up more and more nets over the years.
Cars are being made safer constantly (thanks in no small part to a big push from non-freedom-loving Ralph Nader).
And even smokestacks are gradually being made safer with industry kicking and screaming about it. Although not quickly enough imo.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
In these stratified societies, the persons of chiefs and priests were marked out by their being taboo. They were thus to be avoided by those of lower rank, and must subject themselves to numerous personal restrictions. A measure of their rank and power was also given in their ability to impose taboos on other persons, places, and objects, restricting access to them and making them also into a source of dangerous power.

From the first paragraph of the Oxford entry near the end of this page: Taboo | Encyclopedia.com
 

mdchachi

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Messages
3,837
Reaction score
1,237
Did you even read what I quoted in that post??

Its not a rhetorical question. Did you, or didn't you?
You didn't quote anything in that post. That was the whole thing. If you're referring to the taboo thing, I hadn't read it at the time. I read through it just now and it still doesn't connect to baseball and apple pie unless you're simply being sarcastic. I also don't see a better explanation for historical bans of pork. trichinosis seems quite reasonable to me.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
You didn't quote anything in that post.

Post #27, the post in question. The post you replied to saying "This is the least persuasive thing you've said so far. " which I quoted so you would know what I was talking about. I quoted nice gaijin who said: "Sure, life is risk, but you don't have a right to take risks for anyone else. " in post #27.

Before digging in to me in post #29, did you read the bold part I quoted above in my post #27 or did you not?

BTW in case you get lost, its post #27....and there is a quote in it.
 
Last edited:

mdchachi

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Messages
3,837
Reaction score
1,237
Post #27, the post in question. The post you replied to saying "This is the least persuasive thing you've said so far. " which I quoted so you would know what I was talking about. I quoted nice gaijin who said: "Sure, life is risk, but you don't have a right to take risks for anyone else. " in post #27.

Before digging in to me in post #29, did you read the bold part I quoted above in my post #27 or did you not?

BTW in case you get lost, its post #27....and there is a quote in it.
I get what you're saying now. So all I can say is my apologies for jumping into the conversation. I still don't think it makes much logical sense even in that context but I'll let you and nice gaijin work it out.
 

misternada

Kouhai
Joined
10 Sep 2017
Messages
85
Reaction score
31
Just remind me when they start smoking and no smoking section in Japan, you would go to Doutor Coffee, your seat was in the no smoking section then the seat just in front of you was in the smoking section :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: That's a good thing if this low gets effectively enforced.

Wonder about patchinko, they surely would lose most of their customer if smoking was banned.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Just remind me when they start smoking and no smoking section in Japan, you would go to Doutor Coffee, your seat was in the no smoking section then the seat just in front of you was in the smoking section :unsure: :unsure: :unsure: That's a good thing if this low gets effectively enforced.

Wonder about patchinko, they surely would lose most of their customer if smoking was banned.

Just because some places executed smoking and non-smoking sections poorly is not a reason to think they are impossible to do correctly. That's like shutting down all restaurants because of poor hygiene in the kitchen of many restaurants. No. What you do is make good regulations and requirements and only close those that fail to carry them out. Some places have very good smoking sections systems using exhaust fans for example. Better to demand that than to demand fascism.
 

misternada

Kouhai
Joined
10 Sep 2017
Messages
85
Reaction score
31
Some places have very good smoking sections systems using exhaust fans for example. Better to demand that than to demand fascism.

Well, I've seen some of those places with an aquarium for smokers, but it seems almost impossible to contain smoke, they open the door all the time, if you can't stand smoke better be far away from it. Completely banning smoking is the way to go I think.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Well, I've some places with an aquarium for smokers, but it seems almost impossible to contain smoke, they open the door all the time, if you can't stand smoke better be far away from it. Completely banning smoking is the way to go I think.


Fascism is never the way to go.

Surely those places with smoke leaking out could have been upgraded. Make a law demanding certain requirements, I bet they will be met, even if some company has to come up with new technology to make it work. Just ban it all? No. We leave that to China, Singapore and North Korea.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Well, Japan and fascism that's a long story and it is not close to an end imho ;)

That's funny because I see a whole lot of non-Japanese suggesting fascism at every turn on the internet. If its not banning smoking then its near marshal law of a lockdown over corona....or death penalty for everything, etc. Its always the people who never actually lived under fascism that are real quick to embrace it. Notice how it might only be semantics but if you say Japan has a military they will quickly correct you and say its a self defense force. Meanwhile America always bellyaches about self defense while having bases all around the globe.

Japan has boatloads of freedom if you just look for it. I will admit many are drying up here too but look who keeps supporting it loudly...foreigners. Sometimes its even the U.S. government forcing the Japanese government to kill our freedom.

You need a new opinion.
 

misternada

Kouhai
Joined
10 Sep 2017
Messages
85
Reaction score
31
Right or wrong, Japan has a strong fascist image, some nostalgic of the Axis powers see Japan has having succeed were Germany failed.
Even nowadays Japanese still celebrate their criminals of war freely at Yasukuni shrine, were neo-nazi in Germany do not enjoy that freedom.

Also some of Japan policies, such as the ones on asylum seekers have xenophobic motivations, especially considering Japan labor's shortage. This helps re-enforce that fascist (as in racist) image Japan has.


To end on a positive note, I would say I am pretty satisfied with how the Japanese government manage the country and deal with crisis like the current one, probably much better than most of Western countries.
 
Last edited:

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Japan has a strong fascist image

Among the ignorant and indoctrinated, yes.

Even nowadays Japanese still celebrate their criminals of war freely at Yasukuni shrine, were neo-nazi in Germany do not enjoy that freedom.

When you write just "Japanese" the assumption is all or most and that is FALSE. FEW Japanese celebrate them....VERY few. But yes, Japanese still enjoy the FREEDOM to do so.

That said, America celebrates her war criminals, such as Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Jackson, going so far as to put their faces on their currency. Harry Truman could well be the next war criminal on U.S. money.

And Germans are pretty fascist for banning anything Nazi. They go WAAAAY overboard with it, as do the Austrians where you may not even doubt official Holocaust figures.

And that brings us back to the fascism of cheering a total smoking ban, or even in all bars and restaurants. Westerners just cannot even see their own fascism, and Japanese are now going blind as well.
 

Petaris

Sailing away...
Donor
Joined
3 Aug 2007
Messages
588
Reaction score
144
I think that the bans on smoking in public are acceptable. Its up to a person if they want to smoke or not, but anyone around that person has to either leave or breath second hand smoke. Second hand smoke has health consequences even to a generally healthy person, but it can be even worse for anyone with respiratory issues like Asthma for example.
 

mdchachi

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Messages
3,837
Reaction score
1,237
Surely those places with smoke leaking out could have been upgraded. Make a law demanding certain requirements, I bet they will be met, even if some company has to come up with new technology to make it work. Just ban it all? No. We leave that to China, Singapore and North Korea.
If I understand the law correctly they didn't ban all smoking, even in Tokyo. Places without hired help could still allow smoking as well as places that install smoking accommodation could as well.

The Japan-wide law bans indoor smoking with some exceptions – with posted signage, smoking will be allowed in smaller cafés, bars and restaurants, for example. But the Tokyo-wide ordinance doesn’t have this exception: it specifically bans smoking in dining establishments with hired employees, which make up roughly 84% of Tokyo's cafés, bars and restaurants. If the owner still wants to accommodate smokers, they are required to be separated from the main, non-smoking establishment. For example, by featuring an attached smoking box or room.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
If I understand the law correctly they didn't ban all smoking, even in Tokyo. Places without hired help could still allow smoking as well as places that install smoking accommodation could as well.

The Japan-wide law bans indoor smoking with some exceptions – with posted signage, smoking will be allowed in smaller cafés, bars and restaurants, for example. But the Tokyo-wide ordinance doesn’t have this exception: it specifically bans smoking in dining establishments with hired employees, which make up roughly 84% of Tokyo's cafés, bars and restaurants. If the owner still wants to accommodate smokers, they are required to be separated from the main, non-smoking establishment. For example, by featuring an attached smoking box or room.

Sounds like a defacto ban in Tokyo hidden behind a wall of words to me. The number of places that will be able to continue may be in the single digits given those restraints. BS.
 

bentenmusume

やれやれ
Contributor
Joined
12 Oct 2004
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
733
I'm not disputing your larger point, but it's not single digits. Any oldschool family-run izakaya or individually-run スナック would be exempt. I've seen more than a few myself (and I'm not going out of my way to look for them).

Again, I agree with your overall point about legislating morality. I'm not a fan either.
 

Mark of Zorro

先輩
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
2,427
Reaction score
315
Any oldschool family-run izakaya or individually-run スナック would be exempt.

Unfortunately you cherry picked and left out the following, which won't happen for lack of physical space in your typical one-man or family operation: " If the owner still wants to accommodate smokers, they are required to be separated from the main, non-smoking establishment. For example, by featuring an attached smoking box or room. "

Plus, do you think it will be attractive to anyone, even smokers, to have a box in the corner to go smoke even if there is just a little space for that? No. Its going be horrific. It will be such an eyesore and waste of what little space they have, they won't do it, as it will be uncomfortable even for the non-smokers. It will drive away ALL customers. At that point, a smoker would rather just go outside to have his smoke.

What they want to do is smoke with their drink and food, at their table, and relax.....not go to a booth for it. If they have to go to a booth they will go outside instead....or go elsewhere...or stay home.

This whole thing is garbage.

Only a few will have 1) no employees AND/ PLUS 2) enough space for an actual room for smokers that is NOT the main room. And I cannot emphasize enough how important that "NOT the main room" bit is. It has to be a smaller space or they will be violating the rules. I doubt it can even be an equal space. So how will they measure? That decision is probably going to be like some kind of gerrymandering. Required measurements alone can be used to kill anything at all.....just set up the proportions and numerical targets correct and nobody can freaking do it. Its how they killed legal dancing in this country's bars. Really. That's the kind of feces they pull here.....technically it can be done...realistically almost no one can or it won't be worth it.
 
Last edited:

bentenmusume

やれやれ
Contributor
Joined
12 Oct 2004
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
733
I read that as applying to only the 84% of establishments with hired employees, as the ban does not apply to the others in the first place.

Or maybe I'm wrong and the old dude at an oldschool shitamachi izakaya I saw was just flouting the law for his longtime customers' sake. If so, good on him.
 
Top Bottom