Thread by @Ishikawa_Sachi

#性行為強要 (sexual coercion) is trending in Japan.

Sankei Headlines reads: "Woman who had an affair to pay damages after Sexual Coercion case judged fake."

There is a lot to unpack here.

What happened:

A man (M) was having an affair with his subordinate (S). She reported him as having coerced her into sex and he was fired from his job at Nissan.

His wife (W) sued S for 10M yen in compensation for damages.

Yesterday, Tokyo District Court ruled that S's accusation was false because even after the alleged assault, M and S would go out on dates.

The court stated that "it's natural to think S had positive feelings about M, so we conclude that she was in that relationship willingly."

The wife was found to have suffered, and is to be compensated with 400K yen.

M has been re-instated in his job at Nissan after suing them and winning the case.

DISCLAIMER:

I DO NOT KNOW what happened between M, S, and W. I DO NOT KNOW the details pertaining to THIS case. I DO NOT KNOW enough to make a judgment based on the information I have.

I DO KNOW that the reasons cited are bullshit.

DISCLAIMER:

I am writing this tweet on the basis that the court ruling is absolute and that the judge made the best call with the information available (and not available to the public).

My opinions are based on my perceptions alone.

DISCLAIMER:

My intent is to point out the systemic failures that allowed this situation to begin with.

Yet again we find a situation where women are vilified for being in a relationship with married men - instead of, you know, vilifying the man who did the actual cheating.

Is it okay for anyone to date a married person? IMO, no.

Is the cheater who is married at fault? Yes.

Also, please note the power (im)balance between M and S.

I cannot help but wonder if S felt safe ever rejecting M's advances (which again - he's married). If she was his subordinate, did she have the choice to say "no" without repercussions?

Plus, how is a company like Nissan okay with employees dating their subordinates at all? I'm not even talking about cheating or dating someone from a different department...

Imagine if he'd also treated her favorably *because* they dated. That's unfair, right?

And do people even understand what "sexual coercion" means? The problem with coercion is that the victim is saying "yes" against their will - which makes it a no - which makes it rape.

And if she was his subordinate... how safe was it for her to say anything *but* "yes"?

The Court claims that they "went out on dates" therefore there couldn't be "bad feelings."

Anecdote: I went on dates with my rapist.
Does that mean he didn't rape me? No.

It just means I did not understand what had happened to me at the time. Sometimes it takes YEARS.

So I'm basing my following statements on the rule that the judge did the best they could with the info they had.

My problem is that the info we have is not designed for victims.

Even if S was terrible person (who knows), this system is not designed for victims.

And with this verdict today setting precedence, how can a victim of rape and sexual assault come forward? How can a victim explain that they were coerced out of fear of their supervisors? That they were gaslit into saying "yes."

Because this DOES happen.

If S indeed lied as the Court ruled, she has thrown under the bus hundreds and thousands of victims of sexual coercion.

If she is innocent, then she was failed by a system designed to fail people like her.

Either way, victims are further hurt.

But how can we even fix this? Well, by taking accountability.

By blaming the cheaters for cheating.
By companies enforcing relationship boundaries at work (if they work together).
By educating the Court on what sexual coercion *is.*

Etc.

Either way, victims lost a lot today.