2021-02-20

5.4.2] PROHIBITIONISM IN THE LATE 19TH AND EARLY-20TH CENTURIES

 The Transnational Governance of Human Trafficking in Japan 

 

Ben Chapman-Schmidt 

A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of The Australian National University, November, 2017 

 

PROHIBITIONISM IN THE LATE 19TH AND EARLY-20TH CENTURIES

Internationally, the late 19th- and early 20th-century was also the period of the diffusion of the sex work prohibitionist movements, which soon spread to protestant communities in Japan. Even before the Meiji Constitution of 1889 enshrined a right to religious freedom, the ban on Christianity was only partially enforced, allowing for a mild proliferation of Christianity.[1] The predominance of Americans and British among foreigners in newly opened Japan meant these early Christians were primarily Protestant, and they brought with them Protestant discourses on sex work—specifically, that its immorality required its prohibition. In 1880, the Annaka Church submitted a proposal to prohibit licensed sex work in Gunma, where it was located. This initial effort was fruitless, but the church persisted in organising campaigns against sex work in Gunma over the next decade, until they (temporarily) succeeded in 1892. Their efforts also led to the formation of local and national Prostitution Abolition Leagues, and encouraged the Salvation Army and the Japanese Women’s Christian Temperance Union (JWCTU) in their own prohibitionist efforts.[2]

The JWCTU was founded as a branch of the World WCTU in 1886, and despite their English name, their focus was not exclusively on temperance but rather on a broader platform of moral reform. As such, the JWCTU made a tactical decision to include neither “temperance” nor “Christian” in their Japanese name in order to broaden their appeal, instead calling themselves the Fujin Kyōfūkai (“Women’s Reform Society”).[3] Ultimately, prostitution displaced the consumption of alcohol as their primary target for prohibition. As with alcohol, they described sex work—and by extension, sex workers—as a corrupting vice that needed to be stamped out for the protection of (upper middleclass) women and their families. In pursuit of this objective, they actively stigmatised sex workers, referring to them as shūgyōfu (“women of the unsightly occupation”) or sengyōfu (“women of the lowly occupation”).[4] The Salvation Army, meanwhile, focussed primarily on rescue work, establishing shelters such as the Women’s Home for the purpose of “rescuing” “fallen women.”[5] Following this example, the foreign auxiliary of the JWCTU established the Jiaikan, the “House of Kindness,” which provided food and shelter for former sex workers while trying to transform them into productive (non-sexual) labourers.[6] 

However, the main goal of these organisations was the abolition of the system of licensed prostitution. Operating as part of the broader Prostitution Abolition Leagues, they had some localised successes in eliminating specific brothel districts, accomplished by pressuring local authorities into declining to grant or renew licences for brothels.[7] However, the prohibitionists were unable to prevent Yoshiwara from being rebuilt after it was destroyed by a fire in 1911.[8] Following this defeat, the male abolitionists formed their own group, the Kakuseikai (“Purity Society”) to act as brother organisation to the JWCTU, and were able to recruit to their cause a number of high-profile, non-Christian political figures. Through these efforts, these groups were able to pressure a number of prefectures to prohibit licensed prostitution, and in 1934 the Home Ministry announced that the licensed system would be abolished in the near future. However, even with this expanded reach they struggled against the deep coffers and political connections of the sex industry, as well as the widespread patronage of the industry by male members of the elite.[9] 

At the same time, the goals of these moral entrepreneurs shifted from ending the licensed system to criminalising sex work more generally. This would seemingly put the JWCTU at odds with the global prohibitionist movement, which claimed to be freeing women from sexual slavery. However—as both contemporary prohibitionists and sex workers’ rights advocates agree—despite its superficially abolitionist rhetoric, the international antitrafficking movement had by this point already been hijacked by moral puritans who aimed to suppress and reform immoral practices and practitioners.[10] The JWCTU was simply making explicit the implicit beliefs animating the global anti-trafficking movement at the time, and as such were thus the first group in Japan to adopt a transnational human trafficking governmentality. Both ending the licensed system and prohibiting sex work would, however, prove out of reach until the post-war era.654

Faced with these difficulties, many members of the JWCTU focussed initially on ending sex work by Japanese overseas. In Japan during this period, one common aspiration—not just of the elites, but of commoners and of organisations such as the JWCTU—was the transformation of Japan into a first-class nation that commanded respect on the international stage.[11] This goal was often articulated in slogans such as “fukoku kyōhei” (“rich country and strong army”) and “bunmei kaika” (“civilization and enlightenment”).656 Originally, the existence of overseas sex workers was largely (though certainly not universally) seen as congruent with this goal, since by remitting foreign currency, they contributed to fukoku kyōhei. However, some of the prohibitionist activists sought to recast these women as kaigai shūgyōfu, “overseas women of the unsightly occupation,” whose presence overseas undermined bunmei kaika. They argued that the significant presence of sex workers among the Japanese communities overseas was making these sex workers the public face of Japan, and was thus propagating a belief that Japan was a backward nation with loose morals. This discourse was in turn heightened by concerns—expressed in editorials and petitions—that the association of Japan with sex workers would lead to a ban on Japanese immigration to Anglo-European countries.[12]

Early responses to the outbound migration of sex workers were limited to criminal laws targeting “traffickers” that were similar to early “White slavery” laws passed overseas. For example, when the Penal Code was promulgated in 1907, it included provisions calling for the punishment of those who received or removed from the country victims of jinshin baibai for the purpose of profit or “obscenity” (waisetsu).[13] However, by depicting the karayukisan as detrimental to bunmei kaika, the prohibitionists were—after decades of campaigning—able to push the government into taking a more restrictivist approach. In 1919, the Japanese government ordered its consuls to encourage and assist the repatriation of all overseas sex workers. Though nominally a voluntary recall, local Japanese communities pressured these women to repatriate, and in Singapore the Japanese consul worked with local authorities to forcibly repatriate virtually all of the karayuki-san there.[14]

Then in 1925, Japan acceded to the 1910 International Convention for the Suppression of the White Slave Traffic, whose official Japanese translation reads as the “International convention for the prohibition of the baibai (“buying and selling”) of women for the purpose of forcing them to undertake shūgyō (“the unsightly occupation”).”[15] That same year, they also acceded to the 1921 International Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Women and Children, whose official Japanese translation reads as the “International convention for the prohibition of the baibai (“buying and selling”) of women and children.”[16] These treaties established a precedent for the use of the term “baibai” as the official translation for the English term “traffic,” a translation that would re-emerge with the use of “jinshin baibai” in the Japanese version of the 1949 Trafficking Convention. These treaties also served to link the karayuki-san (then called kaigai shūgyōfu) to White Slavery, by using the term shūgyō in the Japanese translation of the latter.

More concretely, these treaties committed Japan to criminalising both involuntary sex work and the use of underage women for sex work, with “underage” defined as including all women below the age of twenty-one. Originally Japan made two reservations to these treaties. One was that these rules would not apply to its colonies, a standard reservation made by most of the colonial powers.662 The other—which again Japan was not alone in making—was that they would decide upon their own age of consent for sex work, which they then set at eighteen. The prohibitionists, interestingly, accepted the former reservation, but campaigned vigorously against the latter. These campaigns led to this reservation being dropped in 1927, making it illegal in Japan for women below the age of twenty-one to travel overseas for the purpose of selling sex, and leading the JWCTU to declare victory in their long-running war on overseas sex work.[17] 

From a historical perspective, however, the outcome of these measures is more ambiguous. Although the karayuki-san had served as good sources of foreign currency (for the government) and as useful political pawns (for the prohibitionists) while abroad, they were of no further use to either group once they had been repatriated and were abandoned to their own devices. This did not mean that they were left in shame and poverty—many of the karayuki-san had been able to invest in their households and communities and were respected accordingly, and Mihalopoulos argues that it was only those who failed to

succeed financially who were stigmatised upon their return.[18] On the other hand, many of the karayuki-san had left believing that they were fulfilling their patriotic duty to enrich the nation, only to return to a country that would take to vilifying them as immoral women who brought shame upon it.[19] They were subsequently forgotten until the 1970s, when their memories were resurrected—in particular by Yamazaki’s book Sandakan Brothel No 8 and its film adaptation—as part of a renewed battle over the acceptability of sex work.[20] These works, and their representation of the karayuki-san, would subsequently inform discourses on human trafficking in Japan in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.[21]

As for the hopes that these measures would help Japan be recognised as a first-class nation, these had already been dashed by the US via its explicitly racist Asian Exclusion Act of 1924. This act not only confirmed Japanese fears of an immigration ban, but also suggested that, in the eyes of Americans, Asian countries would forever be “second class.” Even members of the JWCTU and other women’s organisations found themselves continuously confronted by racism and paternalism from their overseas counterparts.[22] This treatment helped convince

Japanese policymakers of the US’s hostile intent, setting them on the path for war.[23]

Finally, it is important to keep in mind that the JWCTU supported Japanese colonialism as a path for “freeing” women in Korea and China from feudalism, allowed the Japanese government to keep in place the reservation preventing application of the 1921 Trafficking Convention to its overseas colonies, and said nothing about the establishment of licensed prostitution in Manchuria. Among other things, these actions created a legal possibility for sending Korean (but not Japanese) women to China to work in the military brothels. The Salvation Army, for their part, was actively involved in the recruitment and transportation of young women as “maid servants” for the new colonies.[24] As a result, the two most prominent “anti-trafficking” civil society groups in Japan would themselves come to be implicated in human trafficking in Japan’s overseas colonies and captured territories.           



[1] Notto R. Thelle, Buddhism and Christianity in Japan: From Conflict to Dialogue, 1854-1899 (Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press, 1987), 10–18.

[2] Fujime, “The Licensed Prostitution System and the Prostitution Abolition Movement in Modern Japan,” 149–50.

[3] “Christian” would later be added back in, but never “temperance.” See Elizabeth Dorn Lublin, Reforming Japan: The Woman’s Christian Temperance Union in the Meiji Period (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2010), 31, 169.

[4] Bill Mihalopoulos, “Mediating the Good Life: Prostitution and the Japanese Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, 1880s–1920s,” Gender & History 21, no. 1 (April 1, 2009): 19–38, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0424.2009.01533.x; Lublin, Reforming Japan; Mara Patessio, “The

Creation of Public Spaces by Women in the Early Meiji Period and the Tokyo Fujin Kyofukai,” The International Journal of Asian Studies 3, no. 02 (July 2006): 155–182, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479591406000313; Fujime, “The Licensed Prostitution System and the Prostitution Abolition Movement in Modern Japan.”

[5] Jack E. Nelson, “Moral Entrepreneuring in Japan: A Labeling Theory Analysis of the Salvation Army’s Efforts,” Review of Religious Research 40, no. 1 (1998): 35–54, https://doi.org/10.2307/3512458.

[6] Manako Ogawa, “Rescue Work for Japanese Women: The Birth and Development of the Jiaikan Rescue Home and the Missionaries of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, Japan, 1886-1921,” U.S.-Japan Women’s Journal, no. 26 (2004): 98–133; Lublin, Reforming Japan, 118–25.

[7] As we will see in subsequent chapters, this remains a tactic for the elimination of establishments offering sexual services in contemporary Japan.

[8] Mihalopoulos, Sex in Japan’s Globalization, 1870-1930, 61–81; Lublin, Reforming Japan, 111–18; Elise K. Tipton, “Cleansing the Nation: Urban Entertainments and Moral Reform in Interwar Japan,”

Modern Asian Studies 42, no. 04 (July 2008): 705–731, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X06002678.

[9] Garon, Molding Japanese Minds, 98–105.

[10] Barry, Female Sexual Slavery, 24–38; Doezema, Sex Slaves and Discourse Masters, 59–60. 654 Fujime, “The Licensed Prostitution System and the Prostitution Abolition Movement in Modern Japan,” 153–58.

[11] Michael R. Auslin, Negotiating with Imperialism: The Unequal Treaties and the Culture of Japanese Diplomacy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004), 146–75; Mihalopoulos, Sex in Japan’s Globalization, 1870-1930, 83–104; Jansen, The Making of Modern Japan, 371–413. 656 Lublin, Reforming Japan, 2–3.

[12] Sidney Xu Lu, “The Shame of Empire: Japanese Overseas Prostitutes and Prostitution Abolition in Modern Japan, 1880s–1927,” Positions 24, no. 4 (November 1, 2016): 839–73, https://doi.org/10.1215/10679847-3666065; Lublin, Reforming Japan, 101–25; Fujime, “The Licensed Prostitution System and the Prostitution Abolition Movement in Modern Japan,” 154–58.

[13] Keihō, Act No. 45 of April 24, 1907, Ch. 33. In Kinzō Yamano, Shinkyū Keihō Taishō (Tokyo: Yūhikaku, 1908), 144–47. The Penal Code (Keihō, also sometimes translated as the “Criminal Code”), is another of the six basic codes of Japan. See Oda, Japanese Law.

[14] Warren, Ah Ku and Karayuki-San, 159–77.

[15] Full text of the MOFA’s official Japanese translation available from: http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/treaty/pdfs/B-S38-C1-353.pdf. See also Appendix 3.

[16] Full text of the MOFA’s official Japanese translation available from:

http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/treaty/pdfs/B-S38-C1-373_1.pdf. See also Appendix 3. 662 See reservations in the appendices to the 1910 White Slavery Convention and the 1921 Trafficking Convention, supra.

[17] Lublin, Reforming Japan, 111.

[18] Mihalopoulos, Sex in Japan’s Globalization, 1870-1930, 34–36.

[19] Warren, Ah Ku and Karayuki-San, 159–77.

[20] Mihalopoulos, Sex in Japan’s Globalization, 1870-1930, 1–36.

[21] See Tomoko Yamazaki, Sandakan Brothel No. 8: An Episode in the History of Lower-Class Japanese Women, trans. Karen Colligan-Taylor (1972; repr., Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1999); Kei Kumai, Sandakan Hachiban Shōkan Bōkyō, DVD (Toho, 1974).

[22] Manako Ogawa, “The ‘White Ribbon League of Nations’ Meets Japan: The Trans-Pacific Activism of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, 1906–1930,” Diplomatic History 31, no. 1 (January 1, 2007): 21–50, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7709.2007.00601.x.

[23] Izumi Hirobe, Japanese Pride, American Prejudice: Modifying the Exclusion Clause of the 1924 Immigration Act (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2001); John W. Dower, War without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War (New York, NY: Pantheon Books, 1986), 27.

[24] Fujime, “The Licensed Prostitution System and the Prostitution Abolition Movement in Modern Japan,” 158–62.

No comments: