If you think naked sushi is a little degrading...

[Oyuki kigan 0]

Wait till you see whats for dessert. Unless you'd like to live in a fantasy world where women only exist to serve men, tie your hands behind your back before you read this (i don't want you punching out your computer screens).

Japanese ladies, what do you think?

 

Turning back the clock on gender equality

Proposed Constitutional revision could weaken Japanese women's rights

 

 

......... by SATOKO KOGURE May 22, 2005

 

As the government emphasizes patriotism as part of the national school curriculum and discussion continues apace over revising Article 9, some Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) lawmakers are calling for changes to the Constitution that may put equal rights and individual freedom at risk.

 

 

 

The ongoing discussion on revising the Constitution has grown to include calls for amendments to Article 24 -- the clause protecting gender equality in postwar Japan -- in a bid to lock conservative family values into the legal and social framework at the expense of individual freedom.

 

 

 

Last June, an LDP Constitution revision panel introduced a plan to revise Article 24, which took effect in May 1947, "from the viewpoint of stressing the value of family and community."

 

 

 

However, this has sparked a storm of protest, mainly among women and defenders of human rights, who argue that the panel's suggestions are aimed at assigning fixed gender roles in society so as to return to a pre-war social model and force women to stay in the home.

 

 

 

Article 24 states that "laws shall be enacted from the standpoint of individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes."

 

 

 

But the LDP panel held that " 'individualism' has come to mean 'egoism' in postwar Japan, leading to the collapse of family and community."

 

 

 

Arguing that the Constitution should maintain traditional values and morals that they believe were neglected when the Constitution was drafted by occupation forces after the war, the panel implicitly laid the blame for postwar 'egoism' at the feet of Japanese women who have chosen careers and independence over early family life and child-rearing.

 

 

 

The panel's appreciation for traditional values is itself rooted in an admiration for the Japanese self-sacrificing attitude.

 

 

 

"It's a matter of course that the mother had a primal responsibility for her child," says LDP panel member Nishikawa Kyoko who herself raised two children as a full-time housewife.

 

 

 

"Complaining about fixed gender roles is so nonsensical," she says. "It's a simple fact that men and women have essential roles based on their sex. Only women can bear a child. Criticizing sex roles is weakening women's minds. Mothers should naturally appreciate their responsibilities toward their own children."

 

 

 

She believes that this feeling has been lost by some Japanese mothers. "But this responsibility is not shared by all of today's mothers. It's very irresponsible that today's mothers just have a child and don't fully take care of it. Expressing the value of family in the Constitution is my message for those mothers."

 

 

 

However, the concept of "essential gender roles" was long the basis for justifying gender-inequality, confining women to the home and denying them public roles. By the same token, when individuals are defined primarily as one member of a family, women's rights and freedoms will always be at risk under the pretext that women have roles that only women can play.

 

 

 

University of Tokyo Professor Takahashi Tetsuya believes that recent ruling party moves to alter the Constitution are troubling. "While women are expected to maintain the family and take care of children and the elderly, men are expected to support the country," he says. "Today's discussion on Article 24 is closely connected to the discussion on Article 9, the war-renouncing provision. As the LDP panel suggested in its report, since the constitutional provisions under discussion now specify people's responsibility to defend the country, they need people for the front. This is viewed as the man's role."

 

 

 

The panel's efforts are not simply designed to undermine equal rights. Rather they seek to produce individuals suited to the government's needs, he believes. "In this sense," he says, "individual dignity, which is stipulated in Article 24, would be undermined by assigning fixed sex-roles. The government is trying to change the national character by sacrificing the individual's rights for the family and, by extension, the family for the country."

 

 

 

It was precisely this form of pre-war social model -- that is, the devoted mother serving her husband, who in turn unquestioningly served the emperor on behalf of empire and war -- that prompted the inclusion of Article 24 in the postwar Constitution in the first place.

 

 

 

Beate Sirota Gordon, who drew up Article 24 as a civilian member of the General Headquarters of the Allied Forces in 1946, says that the clause was essential to progress in postwar Japan. "I saw that Japanese women -- my friends and acquaintances -- had no rights, so I tried to include as many women's rights as possible in the Constitution," she said during a visit to Tokyo last month.

 

 

 

Gordon remembers that the Japanese government was fiercely opposed to Article 24 in discussions with GHQ. "There was a harsh objection to the gender-equality provision from the Japanese side, just as they were opposed to the emperor's status change," she says.

 

 

 

Interestingly, Gordon's original draft of Article 24 did include a reference to family values -- "The family is the basis of human society and its traditions for good or evil permeate the nation" -- which was removed from the final version. In fact, however, Gordon's view of family and individual differs sharply from that of the LDP panel. While Gordon viewed the family as based on "individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes," the panel's aim to prescribe individual responsibility to sustain the family poses a direct threat to individual rights, notably those of women.

 

 

 

Dismayed at efforts to alter articles 24 and 9, Gordon says: "Both Article 9 and 24 are needed for world peace. There are many oppressed women in the world. Japan should be proud of its Constitution, and other countries should follow the Japanese model."

 

 

 

Indeed, Article 24 of today's Constitution has helped postwar Japanese women gradually achieve important status and social protections in several areas.

 

 

 

The legislative by-products of the provision include the Equal Employment Opportunity Law (1986), the Basic Law for a Gender-Equal Society (1999) and a Law for the Prevention of Spousal Violence and the Protection of Victims (2001). The Equal Employment Opportunity Law was revised in 1997 to prohibit discrimination against women at all stages of employment.

 

 

 

Nevertheless, the impact of these legal developments has been relatively limited. While women accounted for 41.1% of the country's total employment in 2004, 39.9% of these employed women worked part-time, accounting for 69.3% of all part-time workers. Part-time workers are paid only 65.7% of full-time workers, and receive limited rewards. This is among the important causes of the high wage gap between sexes in Japan; the average female earned 67.6% of the pay of the average male in 2004. [1]

 

 

 

In the United States, female share of the total employment in 2004 was 46.5%, and approximately 26% of these women worked part-time. With more participation in full-time work, the median wage of women in the United States was 80% of the wages of men. [2] Likewise, the participation of part-timer workers among working women in most European countries was far lower than that in Japan [3] and the wage gap between sexes was smaller with women earning 81.8% of men's wages in the United Kingdom (2004), 85.8% in France (2004) and 74.0% in Germany(2003). [4] In these countries, the wage gap between female full-time workers and part-time workers was also smaller: female part-time workers earned 74.5%, 81.7%, 87.5% of the wages of full-time female workers in the United Kingdom (2000), France (1994), and Germany (1995).

 

 

 

However, despite the gaps in legislation and the persistence of differences in work and income patterns between men and women, the progress in Japan's legal framework in the last decades still deserves attention. The above-mentioned legislation was based on the constitutional guarantee of gender equality.

 

 

 

That provision itself was an achievement rooted in modern history. As Gordon observes, "Japanese women, who had been struggling for their rights in pre-war time, deserved and realized Article 24." The pioneers of the Japanese feminist movement include Kishida Toshiko and Kageyama Hideko of the Meiji era (1868-1912), and Hiratsuka Raicho and Ichikawa Fusae, who fought for women's suffrage, equal opportunity in education, and protection of motherhood in the democratic movement of the Taisho era (1912-1926). Although Gordon consulted European models such as the Constitution of the Weimar Republic and those of the Scandinavian countries when drafting the provision, her proposal included women's rights and protections that earlier Japanese feminists had been calling for.

 

 

 

Despite these developments over a century, however, Japanese lawmakers have recently come under attack for failing to adequately promote awareness of equal rights. For example, a report issued by the Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women of the United Nations two years ago "stressed the importance of sensitizing and training public officials and members of the judiciary to eliminate gender-biased stereotypes."

 

 

 

In spite of the constitutional provision and subsequent laws and social movements, gender stereotypes that pose difficulties for women who aspire to achieve equal rights and opportunities remain widely accepted in Japan. Revising Article 24 of the Constitution will provide a setback for those aspiring to gender equality.

 

 

 

Notes

 

 

 

[1] The statistical figures of Japanese situation are based on: The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare. 2005. FY 2004 The actual conditions of working women (Hataraku Jyosei no Jitsujyo).

 

 

 

[2] The statistical figures of the U.S. situation are based on: U. S. Department of Labor. 2005. Women in the Labor Force: A Databook.

 

 

 

[3] OECD. 2004. OECD Employment Outlook 2004.

 

 

 

[4] European Industrial Relations Observatory(EIRO). 2005. Pay Developments 2004.

 

 

 

Satoko Kogure is a writer on Japanese political affairs and military history, and a columnist with The Japan Times. This is a revised and expanded version of an article that appeared in The Japan Times, May 3, 2005.

[Ocean11 0]

Women's Success in Office Closely Linked to Corporate Performance

 

A survey conducted by the Japan Institute of Workers' Evolution in early 2003 showed that sales growth and corporate performance is closely related to the proportion of female workers in the company and changes in the number of female managers. Company performance was graded into five ranks and compared with competitors using a "comprehensive management evaluation index." The survey targeted 3,347 companies in Japan, including major companies listed on the top and second tiers of the Tokyo Stock Exchange, over-the-counter stocks, and both life and non-life insurers.

 

The survey found that full-time female workers accounted for 20.1 percent of the total number of employees, down by about 5 percent compared to five years earlier. On the other hand, the number of female managers showed an increase in one third or more of the companies.

 

It is interesting to note that the companies with a higher proportion of female workers had a larger increase in sales since the previous survey, and also had more positive self-assessment of their corporate performance as "good," or "slightly better" than their competitors in general. Also it was apparent that the increase or decrease in numbers of female managers had a close correlation to changes in sales and business conditions. Those companies that had significantly increased the number of female managers during the previous five years have nearly doubled their sales and more than doubled their operating profits. In contrast, a decline was evident in both sales and profits among companies that had either "reduced" or "slightly reduced" the number of female managers.

 

Furthermore, the companies that viewed their efforts to empower women in the workplace as being "progressive" clearly did well in sales growth and management performance. Also apparent was that business boomed among those firms that had expanded female employment and scope of work and promoted strategies to increase the number of female managers.

 

From Japan For Sustainability http://www.japanfs.org/

[veronica 2]

There you go. Us ladies are the success factor. Where I work all the management are old classic suits.

[Goemon 0]

Ocean: Do you have a direct link to the survey itself? I could not locate it on the Japan for Sustainability site.

[Ocean11 0]

Here you go;

 

This is the survey itself;

http://www.jiwe.or.jp/jyoho/chosa/h15anq.html

 

And this is the JFS summary in Japanese;

http://www.japanfs.org/db/database.cgi?cmd=dp&num=979&dp=data_j.html

 

I hope you're not planning to make yourself unpopular at your office by handing these subversive materials around...?

 

"It's a simple fact that men and women have essential roles based on their sex. Only women can bear a child. Criticizing sex roles is weakening women's minds. Mothers should naturally appreciate their responsibilities toward their own children." Indeed, indeed ... so why bother writing it into the Constitution then (unless you plan to have something in there about regularly opening your bowels too)?

[Ocean11 0]

Search in Google for "naked sushi", and clicke on 'Cached' (to avoid registration hassles) for the first item, a Seattle Times article. There's a nice story about old-school feminist uppittiness, and good 'ole boys not really giving a shit, with some crass orientalism added as a garnish.

 

One to savour...

[Goemon 0]

Thanks for the links; I am not intending on doing anything subversive (yet).

 

I was more interested in seeing how they could directly correlate women's presence/involvement/etc. to a corporation's success. It seems like it would be difficult to empirically prove something like that.

[rach 1]

Brains.

Common sense.

Instinct.

Lack of silly testosterone.

 

Beauty, maybe.

[Goemon 0]

I'm not questioning the premise of the study; I'm just wondering how they correlated it statistically. After all, beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

[Ocean11 0]

> Brains.

Common sense.

Instinct.

Lack of silly testosterone.

 

rach, you forgot to mention the pleasant smell they leave on your clothes when you rub one against yourself.

 

Goemon, I didn't look at the study itself. Did you see grounds for the conclusions suggested in JFS? The self-assessment part could well be dodgy, but combined with the doubling of sales which seems hard to argue with, there seems to be a case to be made. It would also be interesting to see what sectors these businesses are operating in. Are they engineering companies, or fashion companies, and does that make a difference?

[Goemon 0]

Ocean: I checked what was available on the website, but could not find the categories which they used to compare companies (from the abstract):

 Quote:

Company performance was graded into five ranks and compared with competitors using a "comprehensive management evaluation index."

Judging by the sheer number of companies they used, it seems they must have crossed many (if not all) industries (also from the abstract):

 Quote:

The survey targeted 3,347 companies in Japan, including major companies listed on the top and second tiers of the Tokyo Stock Exchange, over-the-counter stocks, and both life and non-life insurers.

My only fear was from this particular wording in the abstract (emphasis added by me):

 Quote:

Also it was apparent that the increase or decrease in numbers of female managers had a close correlation to changes in sales and business conditions. Those companies that had significantly increased the number of female managers during the previous five years have nearly doubled their sales and more than doubled their operating profits. In contrast, a decline was evident in both sales and profits among companies that had either "reduced" or "slightly reduced" the number of female managers.

Without knowing more details about the changes in business conditions, it seems hard to pin all of the success/failure of the survey companies on thhe gender make-up of their workforces. I can't judge the cause-and-effect implied in the abstract.

 

For example, did the companies who suffered declining sales/profits reduce only female managers? Or did they reduce both male and female managers? If it is the latter, my suspicion is that those companies were restructuring their business and simply laying off workers. Conversely, the companies that were doing well may have been expanding their workforces (including increases in female managers as a subset of that expansion) as their business conditions improved.

 

I'm reminded of the basic correlation lesson about churches and bars (as referenced here (about 3/4s down the page) and here (bottom of the page) and here (halfway down the page) . "Correlation does not imply causation".

 

Again, I am not questioning the premise of the study. I just don't want sloppy research to deter from the message which they are putting forward.

[miteyak 0]

There could also a correlation between progressive attitudes and the progression of females. It's unlikely a company is only progressive vis a vis women and promotions. A shift in corporate culture probably resulted in many more efficiencies.

 

Any company that represses it's female staff is likely to carry many more inflexible, bigoted notions about business that would make them inflexible, and closed to many other new ideas and practices.

[Dims 0]

Good comments Miteyak and Goemon, the churches and bars correlation is a good example of the perils of mis-reading correlation. I think it may be far too simplistic to draw such firm conculsions without looking at additional factors. Sadly I have seen this type of study used to shape scientific policy many times while I was in Japan.

 

I cannot believe some of the policy "gems" the LDP come up with. This is scary stuff.

[Goemon 0]

Miteyak: I agree wholeheartedly that the more progressive a company is, the more likely it is to succeed. A company that's not willing to listen to all points of views and consider all people for management positions, is inarguably limiting their potential. That's easily backed up by just plain and simple math.

 

I'm lucky to be in a company that actively strives to be progressive in gender issues, racial issues, etc.

[Goemon 0]

Dr Dims is here! Here come da science!