Waseda University issues student guide to avoiding labor exploitation




Tokyo’s Waseda University has given its 9,500 newly enrolled students a guide to avoiding labor exploitation in part-time jobs as companies burdening young employees with excessive workloads are increasingly drawing attention in Japan.

The 48-page guide, compiled by the university’s staff and law students and supervised by its law professors, lists 17 characteristics of abusive practices in jobs provided by “black” companies, such as refusing to give consideration to work hour requests and slapping fines on workers for making mistakes or taking days off.

It also gives advice on how to deal with such problems, explains legal protections, and gives examples of actual cases in which students experienced labor exploitation.

The guide will also be available for anyone outside the university for 500 yen, excluding the consumption tax.


The ‘Regret Equals Rape’ Factor (Also, USC Is Decadent and Depraved)



Everybody remembers the notorious case of John Doe v. Washington and Lee University, in which a university official reportedly told students that “regret equals rape,” advice that John Doe blamed for a false accusation of sexual assault against him by an ex-girlfriend. Washington and Lee settled that lawsuit in February, avoiding a court trial that might have have exposed the elite private university (annual tuition $46,417) to disastrous publicity. This “regret equals rape” motif has appeared in several other cases among the more than 100 lawsuits filed against universities by male students who say they were falsely accused of sexual misconduct and denied due process in the campus kangaroo court system. What happens, in some of  these cases, is that what seemed an entirely consensual encounter is subsequently deemed sexual assault, usually months later, after the accuser has regret or remorse about a hook-up or a relationship. Consider this, from a court filing involving a John Doe lawsuit against the University of Southern California:

Jane, who was a student and athlete at USC, and a group of her friends attended a fraternity party in January 2013 at a large, off-campus house in the hills near Los Angeles. Jane and her friends caught a bus from the fraternity house to the party location. John, a member of the USC football team, was on the same bus. Also attending the party were two male students from an out-of-state university, “Student 1” and “Student 2,” who were friends of John?s teammate. At some point in the evening Jane began to dance, and John began dancing with her. John said that he and Student 1 were both dancing with Jane, “sandwiching” her between them. When asked about this, Jane did not remember whether it had occurred. After dancing together for a few minutes, John pushed Jane onto a couch and gave her a provocative “lap dance,” which John characterized as “flirtatious” and “silly,” and Jane characterized as somewhat “uncomfortable” because people were watching. After the dance, John, Jane, and Student 1 went to a bedroom together. John had vaginal intercourse with Jane while Jane performed oral sex on Student 1. During the sexual activity, John and Student 1 made comments to each other about Jane?s body. All parties agree that the entirety of this encounter was consensual. Jane returned to her group of friends and told them she had sex with John; she seemed happy and excited about it. Approximately 45 minutes later, Jane and John returned to the bedroom a second time. There were multiple men in the room, and people were continually entering and exiting the room.. . .


It was during this second trip to the bedroom that the incident occurred which “Jane” later claimed was assault. Everybody involved was apparently drunk and, pardon me for drawing any unfair conclusions here, but once she had willingly done a three-way (“the entirety of this encounter was consensual”) during this party, what might a reasonable person suppose the expectations were for this second trip to the bedroom? How about “anything goes”? Call me old-fashioned, maybe, but I have no idea what the prevailing customs and norms are for drunken college orgies nowadays. Really, when you’re partying with football players and frat boys at USC (annual tuition $50,210), what are thereasonable expectations concerning acts of sexual perversion?

Well, John Doe got expelled for his role in this orgy, not because the university has any moral standards — USC Is Decadent and Depraved — but because “Jane” got counseling and decided she was a victim:

The incident happened in January 2013. Jane reported it to SJACS in August 2013. She told SJACS representatives that in mid-February her athletic coach suggested that she had confidence issues, and therefore recommended that she see an athletics counselor. When the counselor asked Jane if she had ever been sexually assaulted, “it dawned on me and I connected it.” She then reported to the counselor that she was assaulted by John and several other men at the party. She told her parents about the incident in July of that year, and reported the incident to the school in August.

The rest of the story is merely details, unless you happen to care about the fate of John, who is just another guy who got chewed up by the campus machinery where male students are denied due-process rights.

What conclusions can we draw from this case? It seems obvious that every student at USC is a dangerous pervert. This is why parents pay $50,210 a year, so that their sons and daughters can have drunken orgies at a “prestigious” private university that has no moral standards whatsoever.

Students at USC are freaks and creeps and degenerates of every description. No conscientious parent would spend a cent to send their child to such a wretched hive of scum and villainy as USC, and therefore the only students who enroll there are the offspring of negligent parents who don’t mind squandering $50,210 a year to have their child “educated” in that foul cesspool of immoral hedonism.

Did Amber Rayne accidentally overdose? Toxicology results expected after death

Friends and family of porn star Amber Rayne are expected to find out whether she died of an accidental overdose today.

The results of an autopsy and full toxicology report are expected back after theactress and adult entertainer , 31, was found dead in her home in Sun Valley this weekend.

According to the Los Angeles Times, her death was reported as a possible accident or overdose after she collapsed while at the property with a friend.


Independence not needed to defend HK interests: CY


The Chief Executive, CY Leung, said the public need not raise the idea of independence to safeguard the city’s interests.

Speaking ahead of the weekly Executive Council meeting, Leung said his administration has always adopted policies that give priority to Hong Kong people.

He recalled the limit imposed on milk powder carried by outbound travellers as an example of a decision that is made to protect local interests.

Meanwhile, the Chief Executive also expressed concern over a conflict-of-interest accusation against Betty Fung, the Permanent Secretary for Home Affairs.

Fung has earlier dismissed allegations of conflict of interest in a flats-swap deal she made with a company owned by a sister-in-law of Macau casino magnate Stanley Ho two years ago.

But Leung stressed the incident will be taken seriously and handled fairly.

The League of Social Democrats filed a report to the ICAC last week, calling on the anti-graft watchdog to look into the case.