Panel mulls imperial status for females but not commoner husbands

There was an article the other day about these panels, there is no way they are willing to change anything. They can give all the excuses they want but in the end it’s the inability to stray from their backward mind set. A panel is a thin veneer to cover their complete lack of any mental capability.

Perhaps this panel of so called experts should publish all the evidence for and against and submit it to a vote of the Japanese people, who after all ultimately pay the bills and it is purportedly a democratic country?

considering not granting such status to their husbands and children, government sources say.

A blatant gender discrimination.

Husbands, I understand, but why are the children of princesses not granted titles when children of princes would?

Japan truly is stuck in the 19th century unable to reform itself.

If Japan can't bring gender equity to royal household, just abolish and do away with royalty.

Blue, you should be paid for your excellent recap of panel. Good job!!

Need more "WTF's" though.

Aiko is first in line to the "throne."

I hope this gets "discussed" soon.

This panel of experts would do well to recommend ending this silly charade called royalty once and for all.

Somebody should tell them a commoner is a royal just without the bestowed title.

@Samit Basu

Indeed, this is why I am glad that countries like Korea, Taiwan and Singapore have actual feminists groups who fight for women's rights. Some men in Korea may be unhappy, thinking that feminism is overzealous, but this is necessary to prevent ultra conservative governments from gaining power and destroying any progress from made in advancing gender equality.

These old Japanese, official have no concept ,what it like to be in love, people generally marry a person out of love,not to please others, people fall in love with people ,not for their pedigree or stage in society, because that the person that bring a feeling of love and joy into their life,lots of the official are in loveless marriage,they could care less for the happiness of other,they should worry about their loveless marriage,and not trample on the happiness of others in love

Prince Harry got it right.

Some mull their way into oblivion.

I never understood what the issue is. Japan had female emperors before, so what are the traditionalists complaining about?

Yrral

These old Japanese, official have no concept ,what it like to be in love, people generally marry a person out of love,not to please others, people fall in love with peopl

Err no, that is actually a very modern concept. Historically, marriages are considered in light of family or (in case of royals) political considerations. And with royalty, that is still the case today, especially in countries where the royalty has not degraded into a pure media show.

Retaining title for female members of the Imperial family makes sense. But for their commoner husbands makes no sense at all since they had no title to start with.

But all you have to do is give the commoner a title and hey presto new royal. Simple as a royal marriage to a commoner loosing their titles. It’s obviously not that hard a thing to do.

Retaining title for female members of the Imperial family makes sense. But for their commoner husbands makes no sense at all since they had no title to start with.

But commoner wives get royal titles when they marry, though they had none to start with. What’s the difference?

But all you have to do is give the commoner a title and hey presto new royal. Simple as a royal marriage to a commoner loosing their titles. It’s obviously not that hard a thing to do.

Exactly.

One law for men, another for women is discriminatory and so early twentieth century.

cleoToday  09:25 pm JST

Retaining title for female members of the Imperial family makes sense. But for their commoner husbands makes no sense at all since they had no title to start with.

But commoner wives get royal titles when they marry, though they had none to start with. What’s the difference?

They shouldn't either IMO. But it reflects the view that the bride "marries into" the groom's family. A default view in most cultures worldwide.

Mulls: in other words, they're going to do sweet fanny adams.