During the 1960’s Anthropologist Kalervo Oberg used the term “Culture shock” first and foremost to describe how human beings can react to unfamiliar places. Oberg was within that context writing about an individual experiencing a new culture in a between a culture experience. According to the professor Stephen Bouchner, who has specialized himself within that field, differences in core values can be a major source of culture shock. Looking back on my experience of Japan it is hard not to put cultural differences in core values as one of the most influential factors of this journey.
On the surface one can easily describe Japan as a modern, polite, organized and clean country with a low crime rate. This is still true as I am about to leave. But the layers and complexities that make this happen did at some point appear during my stay in this country. Bruce W. Davidson writes about two interesting terms called tatemae and honne which refer to a…
“…distinction between one's outward public face and one's true intentions or hidden thoughts. It is often considered more tactful or practical to conceal more than one reveals in words.” 
These terms are not just valid when considering the politeness. They are crucial. One could argue that a public face that hides true intentions or hidden thoughts are to some extant a reaction to fear of social punishment. And by that logic follows that if you don’t have the choice to not help, then by default the polite act turns in to something else. This is not neccessarily unique for Japan, one could probably argue that the western sociologist Erwin Goffmans theory of “Front stage” / Backstage” is similar to the phenomenon. But I would still argue that there is a more common trait among citizens within western societies to say no and be more straight forward about it. In Japan the sense of will is by no means any different but how it is conducted that differs.
Either way Japan is often referred to as a country with collectivistic attitudes or described as a consensus society and relies on what some define as giri – described as the obligations you have to others. I can definitely agree with Japan as a consensus society. This is where the importance of harmony within the Japanese society seems to tie down or suffocate individuals possibilities to act on their own ideas and that social pressure forces people to make decisions on standards set by their group. Consensus per se is not a bad thing, on the opposite, but when consensus in someways are shaped out of fear then it is hard to distinguish between actual consensus and oppression. Some of the Japanese people that I have had the opportunity to talk to about this topic say that one of the problems is also that you do not just represent yourself when you are living your life in a way that the collective disagrees with. You are to some extant representing your family and friends too.
To clarify: going back to my home country Sweden has not filled me with a dislike of Japan. But it has raised some question marks about the Japanese politeness and if people are acting on their believes. It is also how I have come to understand the "lies" that I have encountered from time to time and how they are used as a negotation method often referred to as a misunderstanding on behalf of the person who becomes manipulated. I have also realized how views of gender differs in Japan in comparison to my home country.
Even though I have heard arguments about how the house wives in Japan has a higher status then the equivalents in Sweden, which is probably not untrue, the opportunitys for japanese women to pursuit a career seems to be far more difficult. Hopefully this is something that will change as a consequence of the low birthrates of Japan and the need for economies to grow,
