Tōru Hashimoto's Controversial Defense of Masahiro Nakai: Understanding the Debate on Sexual Violence and Consent

Tōru Hashimoto’s Controversial Defense of Masahiro Nakai: Understanding the Debate on Sexual Violence and Consent

Question from the readers:
Is it true that Tōru Hashimoto, who defends Masahiro Nakai, claims that the actions do not fall under the definitions of sexual harassment or sexual violence as defined by the WHO?

Considering Tōru Hashimoto’s Argument

Recently, Tōru Hashimoto has made headlines with his comments defending Masahiro Nakai. His viewpoint suggests that sexual acts that are not consensual
do not qualify as sexual violence. This assertion is somewhat surprising, as the definitions regarding sexual violence and harassment are crucial from a legal standpoint.

Defining Non-Consensual Acts

The reasoning that non-consensual acts do not equate to sexual violence may hold some merit. However, the reality is that there can be various backgrounds influencing what one might feel is “non-consensual.” For instance, if a person finds themselves in an environment or emotional state where they cannot refuse, labeling the act as “non-consensual” afterward creates a highly unfair situation. This is precisely a factor that I believe Hashimoto has overlooked. As someone who works part-time at a judicial scrivener’s office, I find that interpreting the law can be quite challenging. Particularly in individual cases, circumstances can vary significantly, making it dangerous to simply conclude that “if it’s non-consensual, then it’s not sexual violence.”

The Issue of Silent Suffering

In reality, whether someone can report a non-consensual act heavily depends on their environment and emotional state. Situations where individuals feel compelled to remain silent are not uncommon. This is why I think we should seriously reflect on this issue. Hashimoto’s opinions find support among some people likely because there is a certain rationale behind them. However, we must always consider the human emotions and situations that lie beneath these arguments. While legal interpretations should remain objective, human emotions are complex and cannot be easily compartmentalized.

What Do You Think?

When viewed from this perspective, it’s understandable that opinions on Hashimoto’s statements are divided. I believe it’s essential for us to discuss this issue. I encourage all readers to share their experiences and thoughts in the comments, no matter how small. It would be great if we could deepen our understanding of this theme together.