A South Korean appellate court on Thursday ordered Japan to compensate a group of 16 women who were forced to work in Japanese wartime brothels, overturning a lower court ruling that dismissed the case and prompting a stern protest from Tokyo.
SEOUL, Nov 23 (Reuters) - A South Korean appellate court on Thursday ordered Japan to compensate a group of 16 women who were forced to work in Japanese wartime brothels, overturning a lower court ruling that dismissed the case and prompting a stern protest from Tokyo.
The thing is, this doesn't end by paying that amount. If you have a historical dispute of this complexity, no amount of payment is enough to stop the court cases and national sentiment.
I don’t think it’s the money, it’s the apology. It’s a real “sex slaves learned skills, some of which were to their benefit” Florida education system vibe.
This kind of pedantry doesn't add to the conversation, it takes away from it. "South Korea orders Japan to compensate sex slaves" is a genuinely worse article title than the given one, and contains far less information than referring to them as "comfort women."
Yes, these people were sex slaves. The reason the term "comfort women" is helpful is because these are very specific sex slaves from a specific time, a specific place, and under specific circumstances. South Korea doesn't want Japan to compensate sex slaves, South Korea wants Japan to compensate these sex slaves.
AFAIU Japan uses this term for a different reason. The government (at least domestically) does not recognize these people as slaves. When they reported on their investigation on whether the sex labor was forced, they purposefully used a language that can be taken both ways. I don't know if Abe's cabinet changed the stance, but the word comfort women is still in use because Tokyo can refer to them without classifying them slaves.
If you have a source for that alternative fact you argue, you are welcome to share it here.
Even better that they use the specific term, it brings awareness. I bet you the thread op learned something from your comment specifically because the title used this language.
S Korea could freeze Japanese assets. S Korea and Japan are both members of the international criminal court so maybe that could be a factor. I'm honestly just guessing though. It could end up being a symbolic victory for these women though.
That's also my question, but in my case it's technically why the court can make this decision. I mean, I believe they're right but, as you say, it's outside the courts, jurisdiction as far as I thought how they work.
I believe Japan has said no in the past, yet it makes sense for them to pay money in order to maintain the relationship with South Korea.