When the allies arrived to various territories in the Pacific, they encountered "comfort women," but neglected to look into their cases and bring these crimes to the Tokyo Tribunal. The allies did, however, interview these women and had reports filed with Allied Command and there were even pictures of these women taken when the allies found them. Unfortunately, these reports were never followed through as seen in a report completed by the US military intelligence (US Military Psychological Warfare Team based in Myanmar and India). In their description of the "experiences of twenty women [the] report describes the women as being, for the most part, uneducated and naïve" (Friedman, pg. 115-116). The allies failed to provide justice to these women due to racial prejudice among other issues. This is further enforced by the fact that the only case in which the Japanese were prosecuted on the "comfort women" system as a war crime was "one involving Dutch women in Indonesia, but not the Indonesian women who were Dutch colonial subjects, and the other Guam female residents" (Friedman, pg. 119). Despite this exception, the "comfort women" system was widely forgotten by the world due to the destruction and denial of evidence by the Japanese the neglect of the allied forces, and the socially forced silence of the survivors. This all changed in 1991 when Kim Hak-Sun from South Korea became the first to testify about her experience and filed a lawsuit with 2 other women against the Japanese government requesting an apology and reparations. As a result, many other women from other countries came out and followed suit in the succeeding years. Despite these early claims, the Japanese government initially denied involvement with the system claiming it was the work of private contractors. This all changed in 1992 when Professor Yoshimi Yoshiaki found documentation showing Japanese government and military involvement with the comfort station system. This was followed by the UN Human Rights Commission declaring the military comfort system as crime against humanity. In 1993, the Prime Minister of Japan personally apologized and accepted involvement in Kono Statement, but did not technically accept legal responsibility. Japan then set up the privately funded Asia Women’s Fund for survivor payments and created a digital museum dedicated to the education of "comfort women." Despite this, the apology's sincerity and authenticity has been debated due to the lack of an official government statement and the denialist statements of Prime Minister Abe years later. There have also been issues with the voices of the "comfort women" being excluded in many of the talks concerning reparations between governments and Japan. The most notable example has been Prime Minister Abe's refusal to provide an additional apology at Korean President Moon's request due to him having already made an agreement with former President Park in 2015 (New York Times). Today, the topic of "comfort women" is still controversial and difficult to talk about in Japan, and although there is the Active Museum Women's War and Peace Museum in Japan, Japanese interviews have revealed that the knowledge of "comfort women" among the Japanese populace is smaller than expected. Furthermore, there have been pushes to stop the education about the "comfort women." In 2015, a Tokyo-based textbook publisher, Suken Shuppan, received approval from the Japanese ministry of education to remove references about the discussions about "issuing compensation for 'forcibly moving' foreigners to work in Japan and for 'military comfort women' during the war" (The Japan Times). While there have been efforts by activists, like the Secretary General of Children and Textbooks Japan Network 21, Yoshifumi Tawara, who play major roles in the fight against textbook revisionism, the conflict goes beyond textbooks (Friedman, pg. 192). Statues to commemorate "comfort women" around the world have faced various levels backlash by Japan and other groups who called for their removal. There has also been much debate surrounding Korean Professor, Yuha Park's, recent statements and writing about "comfort women" and how it portrays the women and deflects accountability away from Japan. Meanwhile, the number of media produced and research made on "comfort women" continues to tell these women's stories for various audiences. In fact, this project would not have ever come to fruition if I had never watched Spirits' Homecoming (2016). Though the comfort system ended in 1945, the fight for justice and education on the subject still is alive in 2020.