■ Introduction: What Is “Inmu Eigyō”?
In the ever-evolving world of internet slang, “Inmu eigyō” (淫夢営業) is a uniquely Japanese term that blends meme culture with public controversy. Literally meaning “Inmu marketing”, the phrase refers to a strange phenomenon:
When an official organization — like a police department, government office, or school — posts or displays something that strongly resembles or directly references an infamous internet meme, especially from the Inmu genre, whether intentionally or not.
The problem? The memes in question stem from gay adult video parodies, particularly the now-infamous “A Midsummer Night’s Lewd Dream” (真夏の夜の淫夢), known among Japanese netizens as “Inmu.”
These memes are widely shared by a generation of Japanese internet users but are almost entirely taboo in public discourse. So when they accidentally show up in an official setting — on government paperwork, police infographics, or school flyers — chaos ensues.
And when caught, officials almost always say:
“We didn’t know it was a meme.”
“It’s just a coincidence.”
“There was no intended reference.”
■ Real-World Case 1: The Ministry of Land’s “YJSNPI” Documents
In early 2025, a Japanese government office under the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism (MLIT) handed out sample documents for vehicle ownership transfer. On these templates, various technical fields were filled with placeholder text.
Among them were:
YJ-SNPI(commonly interpreted as a reference to “野獣先輩 / Yaju Senpai”, the main Inmu meme character)TDN-114514(a mix of another Inmu meme alias and a number often associated with the meme)DB(possibly referencing another in-universe term)
Once a citizen posted a photo on X (formerly Twitter), the image went viral.
The government office immediately recalled the documents, stating that:
“We did not intend to reference any internet culture. The codes were randomly chosen and purely coincidental.”
Despite the claim, many online users didn’t buy it.
The phrasing, layout, and choice of code names were far too specific to be unintentional — at least in the eyes of those familiar with Inmu memes.
■ Real-World Case 2: Kanagawa Police and the Meme That Sat Funny
In September 2024, the Kanagawa Prefectural Police posted an image to encourage proper seatbelt use and driving posture.
The illustration showed a muscular man in a tight shirt, sitting in a peculiar pose that eerily resembled the classic meme image of Yaju Senpai. His expression, build, and placement were close enough to trigger an immediate flood of online comments like:
“That’s him!”
“No way this is a coincidence!”
“Kanagawa Police doing Inmu eigyō again?”
A previous similar incident in 2021 had already raised eyebrows, and this second occurrence led to jokes that it was “their second offense.”
The police department explained that:
“We used a real person observed on the street as a model. Any resemblance is purely accidental.”
Still, the internet dubbed it “unintentional Inmu marketing”, and debated whether government offices were trolling the public or simply ignorant of meme culture.
■ Real-World Case 3: A Cram School’s “Free Trial — Come on Over!” Campaign
Also in 2025, a local branch of the Tōshin Satellite Preparatory School distributed promotional tissue packets featuring the phrase:
“Free trial sessions available!”
“Come on over — it’s all yours!”
(In Japanese: いいよ!来いよ!東進に!)
For the uninitiated, this might seem innocent. But for those who recognize it, “いいよ!来いよ!” (“Ii yo! Koi yo!”) is a core phrase from an infamous Inmu scene — one that launched a thousand meme videos and parodies.
Again, the photo went viral.
The cram school’s head office issued a swift response:
“This phrase was used by a local campus without approval. The staff did not understand the cultural meaning. We have recalled and destroyed all distributed materials.”
It was the same pattern again — something recognizable to internet users, but deniable by officials.
■ Patterns Start to Emerge
These cases, while different in context, share a surprisingly consistent structure:
| Aspect | Common Pattern |
|---|---|
| Meme Reference | Highly specific (names, phrases, poses) |
| Origin | Government, police, school — all public-facing |
| Discovery | Citizen posts online (X/Twitter), goes viral |
| Official Response | “We didn’t know.” “Pure coincidence.” |
| Public Reaction | Half disbelief, half amusement — but often mixed with criticism |
This repeating cycle has led to the coining of the term “Inmu eigyō” —
a tongue-in-cheek accusation that “they knew what they were doing”, even when they deny it.
■ The Forbidden Answer: “Yes, It Was Intentional”
So far, every case of Inmu eigyō in Japan has ended with the same official statement:
“We didn’t know it was a meme.”
“We didn’t mean to reference anything inappropriate.”
But what if — just once — a government official, school administrator, or police spokesperson said:
“Yes. We knew it was an Inmu reference. We used it anyway.”
This hypothetical reversal flips everything on its head — and forces us to ask:
- Why is “we didn’t know” the safe answer?
- What happens when institutions do embrace meme culture?
- Why does Japan react so strongly to these tiny accidents?
Let’s unpack the psychological and cultural dynamics at play.
■ Why “We Didn’t Know” Works So Well in Japan
In many Western countries, public-facing organizations might admit to using memes — and even be celebrated for it. Think of fast food chains using viral TikTok trends, or public health agencies referencing popular slang to connect with youth.
But in Japan, the situation is different.
1. Intent = Responsibility
In Japanese society, the moment something is intentional, it becomes subject to responsibility.
A mistake can be forgiven, but a choice must be explained, justified, and often punished.
So if a government office says, “We meant to reference Inmu,” then:
- It’s no longer a misunderstanding
- It becomes a moral failure
- Someone must be held accountable
That’s why “we didn’t know” is not just a denial — it’s a shield.
2. Indirectness Is a Virtue
Japanese communication culture values non-confrontation, ambiguity, and plausible deniability.
Even if everyone knows a phrase is a joke, it’s better to pretend it wasn’t meant that way.
This creates social harmony and avoids embarrassment.
Openly admitting knowledge of a vulgar internet meme — especially one with homoerotic origins — would break that social contract.
3. Internet Culture Is Still Considered Fringe
Although memes are part of everyday life online, mainstream Japanese institutions still see them as juvenile or inappropriate, especially if they originate in adult content.
By admitting to knowing a meme like “Yaju Senpai,” a public institution risks:
- Being seen as unserious
- Losing public trust
- Facing backlash from traditional media
It’s safer to appear ignorant than to seem complicit.
■ But What If They Did Admit It?
If an institution ever said, “Yes, we did that on purpose”, what would happen?
| Possible Outcome | Likely Impact |
|---|---|
| 🚨 Backlash | Public outrage from media, conservative groups, or citizens |
| 🤔 Scrutiny | The institution would face inquiries into its internal review process |
| ⚰️ Sacrificial Staff | A scapegoat employee might be reassigned or disciplined |
| 📰 Media Frenzy | News headlines would emphasize “intentional use of adult meme” |
| 📉 Loss of Trust | Funding, reputation, or public perception could decline |
In other words:
“Knowing” makes it a scandal. “Not knowing” makes it a meme.
■ The Culture Gap: Why Netizens Cry “Of Course You Knew!”
The flip side is this:
The online crowd rarely believes the official denial. Why?
- The Phrases Are Too Specific
→ “114514”? “YJSNPI”? “Ii yo! Koi yo!” — These are not ordinary typos. - There’s a “Wink-Wink” Feel
→ The image, pose, wording, or vibe often feels like an inside joke. - Too Many Coincidences
→ When it happens again and again (Kanagawa Police being a repeat offender), it strains credibility.
Thus, netizens interpret denial as performative innocence — a kabuki-like act everyone pretends to believe, even if no one does.
■ Final Reflection: A War of Contexts
“Inmu eigyō” controversies reveal a deeper truth:
In a hyper-connected world, context collapses.
What makes sense to one group (a joke, a coincidence, a meme)
can be seen by another as offensive, unprofessional, or scandalous.
Japanese public institutions operate in a framework where:
- Intent equals guilt
- Neutrality is safety
- Ignorance is sometimes preferable to honesty
Meanwhile, internet culture thrives on:
- Irony
- Layered meaning
- “You had to be there” humor
The clash is inevitable.
■ So… Who Wins?
No one.
Or maybe everyone.
Public institutions will continue walking the tightrope between accessibility and appropriateness.
Netizens will keep watching for “accidents” with hawk-like attention.
And somewhere in between, another Inmu eigyō post will go viral —
followed, once again, by those familiar words:
“It was just a coincidence.”
“We didn’t know.”
