Any details you could post for those interested in reading more? Case name, date, which district, etc.?
As dense as this stuff is made out as, I wonder how workable it would be?
Would a contractor be able to just drive a nail into it, using a regular hammer and a normal swing? Or would the nail simply refuse to go in, and you're wasting time, energy, and possibly getting injured, just trying to figure out how to fasten the damn stuff?
Likewise for screws: will this need special drivers? Or special drill bits? Etc., etc.
I guessed that lads is latter day saints, but interestingly you spell it lsd somewhere in between, which I thought could be fitting, but after finishing I guess LSD is much more benign.
BTW I disagree with the praying for someone phase meaning and intention, I see your point but some in my family are somewhat religious and they mean it in the sense to think positively of others and share the pain, in their way. I've never found that offensive, but your examples show cases that clearly are offensive, because like you said, they express shortcomings in your character.
Interesting, thank you for the reply, this prompted me to look deeper into things. It looks like Japanese law regarding educational positions has changed some since I last had much exposure to the educational system over there, with a bit of a revamp in 2007. Upon further inspection, I think you're right that the jun kyouju position might be equivalent to a tenured position in the west, although "tenure" works differently in Japan, and might better be expressed as simply an open-ended contract. That said, from reading around just now, it also looks like only Japanese nationals are eligible for this form of tenure, with foreign nationals offered explicitly temporary contracts.
Even assuming that Lockley has (the rough equivalent of) tenure, that would be for his position as a professor of English. This qualification as an English professor seems orthogonal to any judgment on his publications about history.
Dude is a tenured professor at a Japanese university.
Thomas Lockley is a jun kyouju or associate professor (not tenured), and he uses history content as the medium through which to teach English. He is not trained as an historian, but rather as a language teacher. Here is one of his earlier papers from 2011 about "self-access learning", more focused on pedagogy. Here is his listing in the Foreign Language - English faculty at Nihon University (in Japanese), explicitly noting his associate professor status and showing that he teaches several English classes, something about "fundamentals of self-creation" (?), and some kind of seminar.
Here is his own description of his English course offerings for 2024, from page 11 of this PDF course listing archived from the Nihon University site:
Welcome to Nihon University College of Law. Congratulations on your entry. My classes are content-based English classes with a focus on the international history and culture of Japan, containing themes and stories of people from history to help you improve your English and learn content at the same time. I also hold a zeminar class in the final two undergraduate years. I hope you will have a stimulating and informative four years in our College.
Professor Mihoko Oka, whose bio page you linked to, also states that Lockley's work is not academic. From a post of hers on X (in romanization, since Slashcode is still incompetent shit when it comes to Unicode support):
Watashi wa Rokkurii-san no chosaku wa, Nihongo mo Eigo mo "rekishi yomimono" de ari, gakujutsu kenkyuu de aru to wa kangaete orimasen.
My own quick-and-dirty translation:
For my part, Lockley's works in both Japanese and English are "history light reading", and I do not consider them to be academic research.
Considering also that his English-language writings and Japanese-language writings about Yasuke make different statements, I would not personally go so far as to call him a fraud, but I think it is reasonable to not take him as an expert on history, and to approach his works on history with a modicum of caution.
You seem to have greatly mistaken the point of the post you replied to.
That is entirely possible!
My points were reacting more to your statements that Yasuke was a samurai because he was kashin, who fought, was granted a stipend, and was allowed to wear two swords. Half of this is not backed up historically (kashin; two swords), and the other half isn't germain to samurai-ness (fighting, at least at Honnou-ji; stipend).
Cheers!
The word fuchi is translatable as "stipend", but historically this was basically just the payroll of a household — even servants were paid fuchi at that time. This word alone is insufficient evidence for Yasuke being anything but an employee.
Prof. Hirayama's post on X takes some liberties with terminology. Per point 1, see above. Per point 2, primary sources state that Yasuke was given a shitaku or "private residence", not the yashiki or "house with land; a manor, a landed estate", the word that Prof. Hirayama uses. A shitaku could well have been a matter of Nobunaga giving Yasuke exclusive use of an empty gardener's hut, quite a different thing than an estate with land. Per point 3, primary sources state that Yasuke was given a sayamaki or literally "scabbard-winding", which tells us only that he was given some kind of bladed weapon with this kind of scabbard. That might well have been a short-sword with no hilt-guard, as described here at Kotobank (in Japanese). Despite Prof. Hirayama's mention of nitou-zashi ("having two swords in one's sash"), we also have no indication in the original documents of how many blades he was given.
Granted, Prof. Hiroyama's points 1 through 3 might have played out the way he suggests, in which case Yasuke could circumstantially be said to have something equivalent to "samurai" status, despite never explicitly being described as such. But then again, points 1 through 3 might have played out instead along more meager lines, in which case the circumstantial evidence would point towards Yasuke not having the equivalent to "samurai" status.
The problem is that we just don't have enough information in the original documents from that time to be able to say much at all definitively about Yasuke's status and role. While we can't say that he certainly wasn't a samurai, we also can't say that he certainly was.
The page you linked is from 2016 and is on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) site, with content specifically about overseas development assistance (ODA). I've read elsewhere on the Japanese web that the Ministry put out a statement that the page was not vetted for historical accuracy, and was intended to promote good-will relations between Japan and Mozambique. Just now, I found this 2023 PDF on the MOFA site (in Japanese) that mentions Yasuke as one of the early instances of people from Africa visiting Japan, wherein they make no mention of samurai status, and they even explicitly include a footnote stating that the Ministry makes no claims as to Yasuke's origins or status.
About the word kashin, this word has a broad range of meanings during that period of time. Saying that Yasuke was a kashin does not specify anything about his specific role or status in Nobunaga's household organization. Perhaps more importantly, none of the original historical documents describe Yasuke as a kashin: the closest we get is a mention that Yasuke was granted a fuchi or "stipend", which was basically a household salary, paid to employees of both samurai and non-samurai status, including basic servants.
About fighting, we only have evidence that Yasuke was present and fought in the Honnou-ji Incident (Wikipedia article), where Oda Nobunaga was killed. That said, this was not a battle so much as an ambush, where anyone and everyone capable of wielding a weapon would likely have done so. Yasuke's documented participation in the Honnou-ji Incident tells us nothing about his status in the Nobunaga household. When Yasuke was surrounded by Akechi Mitsuhide's forces, he surrendered to them, handing over his sword. Yasuke's captives then brought him before Akechi to ask what to do with him. As recorded in Portuguese by the Jesuits at the time, Akechi stated that, since Yasuke was a beast that knew nothing, and was not Japanese, he should be spared his life, and sent back to the Jesuits ("esse cafre he bestial, que não sabe nada, nem he Iapão, não no matem, la o depositem na igreja dos padres da India", letter from Luís Fróis of the Jesuits about the death of Nobunaga, dated 1582-11-05). Even had Nobunaga granted Yasuke samurai status at some undocumented point, it is clear that other samurai did not view Yasuke as a samurai.
About the swords, we again have no firm clarity in the original historical documents. These mention that Nobunaga specifically gifted Yasuke with a sayamaki. This literally means "scabbard-winding", and refers to the style of the scabbard. We don't know if this was an older-style tachi (traditional Japanese single-edged longsword) for which this scabbard style was first developed (with the winding added to protect the lacquer from wearing, as the tachi was suspended from the obi or sash and would rub against the wearer's thigh), or alternatively a more ceremonial short-sword with a fancy scabbard and no hilt-guard (for example, as described in Japanese here at Kotobank, a Japanese resource aggregator). We also have nothing in original documents to indicate a pair. Moreover, the whole "two swords = samurai" as a defining qualification doesn't happen until later in the Tokugawa period, so the number of swords isn't all that indicative anyway.
The key issue is that, going by the original documents in Japanese and Portuguese, we have nothing stating that he was granted the rank of "samurai". The lack of any such mention could be seen as telling, but then again lack of evidence is not the same as evidence of lack. We just have a lot of lacking evidence.
That said, given what has been documented, we also don't have clarity that Yasuke ticked all those checkboxes. He might have, but then again he might not have. We just don't know. Circumstantially, there are arguments to be made either way. Evidentially, we don't have enough information to say.
(FWIW, I vetted in "Preview", and offer my apologies for any weird misspellings caused by non-ASCII letters disappearing when I actually post this. I continue to be disappointed in the idiocy of Slashcode not supporting Unicode. FFS.)
Trump's second administration is ripping up parts of the country’s cyber playbook and taking many of its best players off the field, from threat hunters and election defenders at CISA to the leader of the NSA and Cyber Command. Amid a barrage of severe attacks like Volt Typhoon and rising trade tensions, lawmakers, former officials, and cyber professionals say that sweeping and confusing cuts are making the country more vulnerable and emboldening its adversaries. “There are intrusions happening now that we either will never know about or won’t see for years because our adversaries are undoubtedly stepping up their activity, and we have a shrinking, distracted workforce,” says Jeff Greene, a cybersecurity expert who has held top roles at CISA and the White House.
Note that, iirc, they state that the building would potentially topple over its neighbours too in the event of a wind caused toppling over.
1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.
