Japan election puts couples' right to choose surname in spotlight

Article should mention that Japanese getting married with foreigner have the right to choose the surname!

Wonderful. In the year 2024 dinosaurs in the LDP cling to the 1896 Civil Code.

A survey of voters last weekend by Kyodo News showed that 67 percent of respondents supported the right to choose separate surnames, while 21.7 percent were opposed.

Ah, then there is no excuse to go against the overall will of the people.

the more conservative organizations supporting the LDP, who stress traditional values, see having separate surnames as undermining family unity.

Conservatives will always want to resist public opinion (except if it happens to support them) and hold us back. It's in the name. There is no need to reconcile opposing views even within the same conservative mind.

She also believes that even the LDP "can no longer say no" to a revision for much longer given that Japan's biggest business lobby, Keidanren, called on the government in June to introduce the option of separate names after marriage swiftly.

Well, now the real holders of power might be able to change things. Conservative values are usually 'flexible' if they see personal gain.

Just give up. There will be no separate surnames, no bans in public indoor spaces and by far, no legal same sex marriage.

This is Japan, the land of forever stuck to old times.

Right to choose surnames……What decade is this?

who am I kidding, what century is this?

Garthgoyle

Just give up. There will be no separate surnames, no bans in public indoor spaces and by far, no legal same sex marriage.

I think we'll see separate surnames in the next three years, five at the latest. And, same-sex marriage in ten.

I have no idea what the ban you mentioned is, though. Are you referring to tattoos?

This is Japan, the land of forever stuck to old times.

Not really, apparently this is a really big deal in Japan but in the US women didn't care as much or the ones that did hyphenate their last names together. Along with a low birthrate I could see some women may be more likely to hold on to their last name if they don't have a brother to pass down the family name

From all the different issues that the politicians could use to get some popularity back, it would seem this is the easiest to concede. And since it is still being discussed and considered difficult to change, this means everything else (from social reforms that facilitate bigger families to gender equality) have a snowflake chance in hell of being properly addressed.

@virusrex

That's just politicians politicianing. It works all around the world. Focus on an inconsequential issue so that you don't have to deal with more complex ones or, god forbid, make anyone meaningfully question the status quo.

No bans to smoking in public places.

None of these three issues I've stated above will change in this decade.

Not really, apparently this is a really big deal in Japan

Big deal for the public. But the dinosaurs in power will not allow any changes. Separate surnames, they will come with some nonsense explanation that it'll destroy the very fabric of family in Japan. Banning indoor smoking? They will defend smoking indoors by stating that one, it is not proven that second hand smoke is bad for non-smokers health. And two, establishments will go out of business because no one will go again if people can't smoke. You know, like business went bad for Starbucks they had to get out of the country right away... And lastly, gay marriage will affect birthrate because gay couples cannot conceive. Because the birthrate is not already downhill...

Three issues that are and have been a big deal for the public for at least the last decade but dinosaurs won't let it happen.

The election results will change nothing with the Koseki system.

From all the different issues that the politicians could use to get some popularity back, it would seem this is the easiest to concede.

I personally believe most of the population don't really care about second names.

I think most people don't really think about it.

The cost of living though. Wages. That's where it's at.

Garthgoyle

And lastly, gay marriage will affect birthrate because gay couples cannot conceive. Because the birthrate is not already downhill...

Same-sex marriage will have zero effect on the birth rate. Gay couples will not conceive regardless of whether they are married or not.

Although, some lesbian married couples might do IVF or similar. And some male couples would adopt, offering hope to orphans.

garypen

Yes, we know that. My comment above was sarcasm. I'm repeating the nonsense politicians have used to defend their reasons to defend these issues.

Japan stands as a unique case in modern society in this regard.

From the article,

A survey of voters last weekend by Kyodo News showed that 67 percent of respondents supported the right to choose separate surnames, while 21.7 percent were opposed.

Given that today is the publication date, the phrase “last weekend” indicates that this survey was conducted Oct. 19/20. Strangely, a Google search did not yield results which could help me locate this survey. This is not to doubt the results, an apparently similar poll by NHK in April revealed similar results (62% vs. 27%). I am just curious if there is a divide between what people feel should be a legal right and the number of people who will actually avail themselves to that right.

I mean, if two homosexual adults want to be legally recognized as a couple, what is that to me? So I don’t think they should be prevented from their relationship being legally recognized. But will I personally avail myself to that legal right? No. Do I think such unions should be held out as the ideal for society? No.

Likewise, should women be permitted to legally use their maiden names if they so desire? Sure. Do I think that women should use their maiden names if they marry? No. Because such women thereby signal that they are not interested in becoming a full-fledged member of the house (家, ie) and are most likely ardent feminists. Like the university professor I had for my class on Japanese culture who had us read articles about how Japan’s koseki-system was sexist because children born within 300 days of a divorce are still presumed to be the former husband’s children and are thus registered to his koseki, but commented “I didn’t know that” when I explained to her in a footnote,

This law is part of the still operable 1896 Civil Code (Part IV, Chapter III, Section 1, Article 772(2)) and reads “A child born after 200 days from the formation of marriage or within 300 days of the day of the dissolution or rescission of marriage shall be presumed to have been conceived during marriage.” (婚姻の成立の日から二百日を経過した後又は婚姻の解消若しくは取消しの日から三百日以内に生まれた子は、婚姻中に懐胎したものと推定する。) In the absence of any method for paternal testing in 1896, this law might have had a logical rational for establishing a legal “presumption of paternity” at that time since 300 days represents an extreme terminus of 10 months for gestation from the time of a divorce. However, in light of DNA testing which has been available since the 1980s and can empirically establish paternity with 99.99% confidence, this law has become antiquated as its rational no longer holds. Similar laws and problems related to these laws are found in the United States as well. For example, the Family Code of California 7611.a reads:

“A man is presumed to be the natural father of a child if … He and the child’s natural mother are or have been married to each other and the child is born during the marriage, or within 300 days after the marriage is terminated by death, annulment, declaration of invalidity, or divorce, or after a judgment of separation is entered by a court.”

In many other states as well the “presumption of paternity” is that children conceived or born during the marriage are the children of the husband or ex-husband. As such, they are registered as the father on birth certificates and obligated to provide child support. However, even in instances where the presumed father suspects or can conclusively demonstrate that he is not the biological father due to an affair by the mother during the marriage, the courts in many of these states will still not allow for the perusal or admittance of DNA evidence in light of the legal presumption so that the legal father remains responsible for child support even if he is not in fact the biological father.

—Me

The same professor who had us read an article about how the Japanese practice of “obligation chocolates” (義理チョコ, giri-choco) is sexist, dismissing the three-fold reciprocal practice of “white day” (ホワイトデー) as irrelevant to the discussion, but was surprised to learn from my reading response that the practice originated with women themselves from high school culture, which explains why it serves as a means to leverage power over men by shaming them in the workplace through their withholding of chocolates from certain men as the article argued.

Men should not marry such women who are evidently so narrowly focused on the societal disadvantageous to women that they are completely oblivious to the societal disadvantageous to men. Who would even like such a woman to have his name? It would be worse than how Ray Kroc took the name of McDonald brothers. And so here we can all find agreement. Peace in our time.

From the article:

A name change could result in a sense of loss of identity…

…or a gain in identity. But it's always a half empty glass for some.

Addendum:

From the article:

Plaintiff Ueda, who has not registered her marriage to avoid having to choose a single surname, said her family has faced many difficulties subsequently, among them her husband's lack of parental rights for their 5-year-old son.

"I worry that my child could face disadvantages as he grows older," Ueda told Kyodo News.

So does Ueda’s desire for legal change stem from these many difficulties?

I was a junior high school student in the early 1990s, when optional separate surnames for married couples became a hot topic and momentum for legal reform was building. I sympathized with the idea that only women have to change their surnames when they get married, and began to think, "I don't want to change my surname either." I believed that the law would have changed by the time I became an adult, but more than 30 years have passed. I became a party to this when I got married in 2013.

In 2015, on the day of the Supreme Court's ruling on the first lawsuit, I was on a business trip to Africa and saw the news of the constitutional ruling online. I was so shocked that I suffered from ringing in my ears and dizziness that continued for about six months.

"I can't wait any longer, I have to take action," I thought, and in the second lawsuit, I took charge of the secretariat for the Association for Supporting the Separate Surname Lawsuit. However, the second lawsuit also failed to be found unconstitutional, so I stepped up with the desire to "change history this time." I will fight, carrying the hopes of the many people both at home and abroad who are in trouble because they cannot choose their own surname.

—https://www.call4.jp/info.php?type=items&id=I0000131

From the article:

I just want to live under my name because it's my name. That's all there is to it.

Indeed. That is all there is to it—since junior high school. Why then even bring up a 5-year-old son and a common law husband?

One of the many reasons why Japan is going down the plughole. Why are people so terrified of change in this place?

It’s this simple.

A Married Man and Woman = A Family

A Family = A Surname

Two Surnames = Anti-Family Policy === Broken Society

Separate surnames after marriage would require revamping the outdated Koseki system. It is one of the old outdated areas that Japan should move forward on. Along with Dual Nationality (with reciprocating nations) and Joint Child Custody in divorces.