siburke: BuddyKiller is right - you are getting waaaaay too emotional about this. I didn't appreciate the flame -- I've never publically flamed you before and I don't appreciate being treated that way. You're welcome to vehemently disagree with me, but there's no need to throw personal insults (and threats?! WTF?? Come on man, act your age!)... this is meant to be a discussion. You don't win debates by throwing insults at people. (-_-)

 

I never said that I was for or against KISS Players.

I never said that I was for or against TF SPAM or pornography (but for the record, I am against it). I don't own any TF SPAM, I just know other Transfans who do... and one of them showed it to me. I don't speak to him anymore.

I never even said that was for or against the Catharsis argument -- I've merely been saying that nobody has been addressing it!

 

I have only supported KISS Players from a legal point of view. I have never supported nor attacked it from a moral or ethical point of view - in that aspect I have remained neutral.

 

Legally speaking, KISS Players is portraying eroticism involving an ADULT (she is stated to be 20 - doesn't matter if you don't want to believe it, that's her official age) and the line is marketed at collectors age 15 and Up; and as I previously pointed out, 15 year olds are legally old enough to M and MA rated TV shows and movies, as well as purchase soft-core erotic magazines.

 

Mild eroticism? A whipping Night Viper including body fluids out of a robot attacking a girl ranks up there with hardcore porn.

I thought it was just a really phallic tongue... (O_o)

 

I also doubt if Takomy has officially issued all the TF SPAM's you mention. The problem to me lies with the fact that this stuff is licened and not drawn by some drooling SPAM creep.

TF SPAM is unlicensed Doujin, but Takara is aware of its existence and they've tolerated it for a long time. What gets me about this is that Takara were more eager to bust up Ichikawa Hirofumi's "Cybertron Chronicles" comic that he was trying to sell at BotCon Japan 2000, which had NOTHING erotic in it, and IMO is one of the coolest TF comics ever made! It bridges the continuity between G1 and G2 - even explains how G1 Smokescreen and Dreadwing become G2 Smokescreen and Dreadwing (and what happened to Dreadwing's Nebulan partner etc). Really cool and exciting stuff! Yet Takara went all Nazi on Ichikawa for doing it, and in doing so ended up killing BotCon Japan and turning the Japanese fandom against them! Why do you think Ichikawa has been so involved with Transformers between 2001 and 2005? IMO part of that reason was to repair relations between the fans and the Takara company.

 

...so someone as cool as Ichikawa Hirofumi gets shot down for creating a comic book that genuinely enriched and added to the tapestry of Transformers lore, yet other folks who are creating TF SPAM literature are just given free reign?! That don't sound right to me. (-_-)

 

And I'm way to lazy to look up any linky to the Catharsis stuff. But I'll read it if you link me.

It's called Google, my friend. ;)

 

Edit: WIKIPEDIA'D! (^_^)

 

Getting over images that portray a childhood hero as a pedophile is a bit harder.I'll say it again-we either dropped to many or too few bombs on those people.

Wait... so eroticism is wrong... but acts of mass violence and destruction is okay!?

 

and tf SPAM? but... theyre robots...

Mecha-hentacles.

and tf SPAM? but... theyre robots...

Mecha-hentacles.

MORE THAN I WANTED TO KNOW'D

and tf SPAM? but... theyre robots...

Mecha-hentacles.

MORE THAN I WANTED TO KNOW'D

 

bwahahaha, check out la blue girl sometime :thumb

I just spoke to a Japanese Transfan about this issue, and here is a part of our conversation...

 

孫コンボイ：掲示���ょ��スキャンダル��るん�ら

Goktimus Prime: There's been some scandal about (KISS Players)

怪è»?三等兵：ã?ªã?«ã??れ？

Tiger Convoy: Whaddaya mean?

孫コンボイ：「エロ���ルノ���呼�れ�ん�

Goktimus Prime: They're saying that it's overtly erotic pornography.

怪è»?三等兵：ã??ã?£ã?¯ãƒ¼ãƒ¼ãƒ¼ãƒ¼ãƒ¼ï¼?ï¼?ï¼?ï¼?

Tiger Convoy: BUH!

孫コンボイ：人ã?Œè‰¯ã??æ–‡å?¥ã‚’言ã?† （海外Transfanã?®ä¸­ã?«ï¼‰

Goktimus Prime: People are really complaining about it (amongst Western Transfans anyway)

怪�三等兵：トランスフォーマー�エロ�似����よ�。

Tiger Convoy: I suppose Transformers doesn't suit eroticism

孫コンボイ：ã??ã?†ã? ã€‚ ã?Ÿã??ã?•ã‚“人々ã?Œã??ã?†ã?¨è‰¯ã??言ã?£ã?Ÿã‚“ã? 

Goktimus Prime: Yeah, that's what a lot of people have been saying.

 

...so it doesn't seem to be much of an issue amongst the Japanese Transfandom. Later on in our conversation, Tiger Convoy mentioned that most Transfans in Japan don't really care about the girl figures and are more concerned about just getting good Transformer toys - but unlike us Gaijin, they're not going to oppose TakaraTomy over KISS Players and are willing to accept their decision with the line (regardless of personal opinion). This is very typical of the Japanese mindset btw (and likewise they would view our oppositional-defiance as typical of Western culture).

 

So yeah... don't count on any major voices of opposition from the Japanese fans. If you really don't like this line, be sure that you get off your arses and contact TakaraTomy yourselves.

 

Methods of contacting TakaraTomy include:

1. You can leave online feedback to them here.

2. Write your angry letters to either of their customer support centres:

JAPAN �京　�客様相談室

〒124�8511　�京都葛飾区立石7�目9-10

株�会社　タカラトミー商�

...or....

JAPAN 大阪　�客様相談室

〒532-0003　大阪府大阪市淀�区宮原4�目3-7

株�会社　タカラトミー商�

3. Call their customer call centres on either +81-3-5650-1031 or +81-6-6395-1031. The call centres are open on weekdays 10:00-17:00JST (UTC/GMT +9) and are closed on weekends and national public holidays.

jmo, your taking this stuff way too personally man. your getting way too upset and missing what's being said. it's just a discussion on a mb on the internet of all places, chill man ^_^

WHAT ON EARTH AM I MISSING???

1. The girl on the box is intentionally drawn to look underage. Yes or no?

2. The girl on the box is drawn in a sexually provocative pose. Yes or no?

Am I just missing the lame reasoning for this filth? I can read it, it's just idiocy & ignorance at its finest.

 

toystoystoystoystoysTOYS.

 

you guys are reading WAY to much into this.

 

and tf SPAM? but... theyre robots...

Because they've drawn child-porn on a toy box it's okay now? If only Gary Glitter knew that "toystoystoystoystoysTOYS" was an alibi, he could've fiddled with some children in TRU instead.

 

How would it feel if someone raped your children, filmed it & posted it on the 'net, to "express their artistic feelings" eh? An extreme example, but I'm sure you get the point.

 

Calling something "Art" is not an excuse for depicting kiddy-fiddling.

 

But these aren't real people! They are fictional! They are ink and paper!

Maybe my example was too far-fetched, I'll give you that. How would you feel if someone drew a picture of someone bowwww bow bow bow bowww your children to "express their artistic feelings" then?

 

siburke: BuddyKiller is right - you are getting waaaaay too emotional about this. I didn't appreciate the flame -- I've never publically flamed you before and I don't appreciate being treated that way. You're welcome to vehemently disagree with me, but there's no need to throw personal insults (and threats?! WTF?? Come on man, act your age!)... this is meant to be a discussion. You don't win debates by throwing insults at people. (-_-)

 

I never said that I was for or against KISS Players.

I never said that I was for or against TF SPAM or pornography (but for the record, I am against it). I don't own any TF SPAM, I just know other Transfans who do... and one of them showed it to me. I don't speak to him anymore.

I never even said that was for or against the Catharsis argument -- I've merely been saying that nobody has been addressing it!

 

I have only supported KISS Players from a legal point of view. I have never supported nor attacked it from a moral or ethical point of view - in that aspect I have remained neutral.

 

Legally speaking, KISS Players is portraying eroticism involving an ADULT (she is stated to be 20 - doesn't matter if you don't want to believe it, that's her official age) and the line is marketed at collectors age 15 and Up; and as I previously pointed out, 15 year olds are legally old enough to M and MA rated TV shows and movies, as well as purchase soft-core erotic magazines.

Firstly, where's the threat? I've looked for it & I can't find it!?!

 

The flames? Read it again & see if my point-of-view on this applies to you & then decide if they're aimed at you. I feel very strongly about this matter so you're either with me or against me, I don't have time for someone playing Devil's Advocate on the subject.

-If you agree with my points (listed below) then fine, the insults were not directed at you. Sorry.

-If you disagree then I don't regret a single word of it. Die.

-If you feel "neutral" about it then just stay out of the thread. Keep away from the fire & the flames won't touch you.

 

(The point I'm making is NOT the "erotic/sexual" part. If the drawing looked like an adult I'd be fine with it. I wouldn't bat an eyelid if it had full-blown hardcore sex scenes containing adults if it was sold to adult collectors. I'd be a bit :wtf but I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep over it.)

 

 

 

 

 

These are the points I'm making:

Can you deny that the child is drawn to look underage? Saying "She's 20, honest!" just doesn't wash with me. If I could get inside the mind of the "artist" that knocked-up this filth, I'd bet a pound to a penny that their intentin was to make the girl look underage. Drawings like this, regardless of where they are drawn, are just plain wrong. It's not just my view, a poll here showed the average age as just over 14. Whatever the laws say in any given culture, a 14-15 year old may be pubescent but they're still not fully developed. Their body is still growing at that age & their mind & emotions still have a long way to go before adulthood. Do you think that depicting them in a sexual manner is appropriate? It's aimed at 15+ year olds (I think?) but what's the maximum age? Do you think it's right for a 40 year old to drool over a drawing of a semi-naked child? The "It's only a drawing, noone's getting hurt!" line falls flat on its face when a real photo of an underage girl naked could replace the image. Is that harming anyone DIRECTLY? Where is the "paedo-line" drawn? How far can it be pushed? Do we need this type of "culture" polluting a civilised world? Images like this may or may not encourage child-molestation & underage sex, but thEy definitely make it seen as being acceptable behaviour.

 

In a nutshell: ARE YOU PEOPLE TOO BLIND TO SEE THE TRUTH?

 

 

 

 

*EDIT*

Typo found. :redface

I just spoke to a Japanese Transfan about this issue, and here is a part of our conversation...

 

??????????????????????????

Goktimus Prime: There's been some scandal about (KISS Players)

???????????

Tiger Convoy: Whaddaya mean?

???????????????????????

Goktimus Prime: They're saying that it's overtly erotic pornography.

??????????????????

Tiger Convoy: BUH!

??????????????? ???Transfan????

Goktimus Prime: People are really complaining about it (amongst Western Transfans anyway)

???????????????????????????

Tiger Convoy: I suppose Transformers doesn't suit eroticism

?????????? ?????????????????

Goktimus Prime: Yeah, that's what a lot of people have been saying.

 

...so it doesn't seem to be much of an issue amongst the Japanese Transfandom. Later on in our conversation, Tiger Convoy mentioned that most Transfans in Japan don't really care about the girl figures and are more concerned about just getting good Transformer toys - but unlike us Gaijin, they're not going to oppose TakaraTomy over KISS Players and are willing to accept their decision with the line (regardless of personal opinion). This is very typical of the Japanese mindset btw (and likewise they would view our oppositional-defiance as typical of Western culture).

 

Are there Japanese Transfans who miss Binal-Tech and it's use of metal parts, or are they content to just get any Transformers at all?

I'm curious how the Japanese TFans feel about this. I know that Japan is a lot more liberal with sexuality with the prevalence of adult anime and manga everywhere with porno stores and used underwear selling, which disturbs me.

 

But do the Japanese TFans actually prefer this over Binaltech?

jmo, your taking this stuff way too personally man. your getting way too upset and missing what's being said. it's just a discussion on a mb on the internet of all places, chill man ^_^

WHAT ON EARTH AM I MISSING???

1. The girl on the box is intentionally drawn to look underage. Yes or no?

2. The girl on the box is drawn in a sexually provocative pose. Yes or no?

Am I just missing the lame reasoning for this filth? I can read it, it's just idiocy & ignorance at its finest.

 

1.) no she isn't. the japanese don't have to skirt around ages. when they bring alot of SPAM and anime to america from japan they have to play around with the ages so as to avoid this issue all together. the japanese don't have this problem and would clearly state if her age was to be any different than 20.

 

the apperance of age and the interpritation of appearance into one's age is completly up to the individual. there are people that are 30 that look 14 and vice versa. she's drawn howver the artist feels she should look, if your seeing her as being "underage" than your just mistaken. as said in the previous paragraph, and time and time again by both me and lazerblast, if they'd wanted her to look 14 they certainly wouldn't have given her those cans, they'd not have lied about her age (once again, they don't have to in japan), and she'd probably be a bit smaller over all as well.

 

2.) at first i did, but then i put all the clues together and realized she's either going to the beach or at the beach and that isn't underwear thats a bathing suit and she isn't stripping, just taking her shirt off as is customary at the beach. obviously if your looking for something sexual your going to find it. it's like the religious people that play records backwards looking for "hidden satanic messages". have you ever listened to stuff said backwards? esp a rock song. if your looking for a hidden meaning your going to find one. the same thing can be applied here.

 

 

Maybe my example was too far-fetched, I'll give you that. How would you feel if someone drew a picture of someone bowwww bow bow bow bowww your children to "express their artistic feelings" then?

 

well obviously, but this is nobody's child, it's a fictional character. she isn't a child either.

 

These are the points I'm making:

Can you deny that the child is drawn to look underage? Saying "She's 20, honest!" just doesn't wash with me. If I could get inside the mind of the "artist" that knocked-up this filth, I'd bet a pound to a penny that their intentin was to make the girl look underage. Drawings like this, regardless of where they are drawn, are just plain wrong. It's not just my view, a poll here showed the average age as just over 14. Whatever the laws say in any given culture, a 14-15 year old may be pubescent but they're still not fully developed. Their body is still growing at that age & their mind & emotions still have a long way to go before adulthood. Do you think that depicting them in a sexual manner is appropriate? It's aimed at 15+ year olds (I think?) but what's the maximum age? Do you think it's right for a 40 year old to drool over a drawing of a semi-naked child?

 

i understand how you feel, and why you feel that way (at least as far as culture goes). i've already covered her age in my first paragraph. you'd more than likely feel different though if you grew up in a culture in which it wasn't socialy taboo. it's like i said earlier, there are DOZENS of paintings and statues depecting far worse than kp convoy and melissa, hell even worse than the whole 3 pages of the manga we saw. i think i've seen over a dozen depictions of roman and greek socialites seducing and bowwww bow bow bow bowww young boys on the history and discovery channel. if you protest and/or want kp convoy and melissa to be destroyed or outlawed than you've got quite a laundry list of artwork to clean up as well.

 

 

The "It's only a drawing, noone's getting hurt!" line falls flat on its face when a real photo of an underage girl naked could replace the image. Is that harming anyone DIRECTLY? Where is the "paedo-line" drawn? How far can it be pushed? Do we need this type of "culture" polluting a civilised world? Images like this may or may not encourage child-molestation & underage sex, but thEy definitely make it seen as being acceptable behaviour.

 

In a nutshell: ARE YOU PEOPLE TOO BLIND TO SEE THE TRUTH?

 

 

does child pornography harm anybody directly? i dunno you tell me. i'm pretty sure that the kids abused and video taped and/or photographed, if they survive at all, are left pretty mentaly Powerglideed up. alot of them grow up, become prostitutes, and die in an ally way with a heroin needle in their arm. drawings, art, and virtual pornography are vastly different than real child pornography with real kids. allowing these fictional types of pornography doesn't make the actual bowwww bow bow bow bowww and molesting of children any more or less acceptable. you can try to apply the same form of logic to theatre and other forms of entertainment. just because we allow violent movies, music, plays, ect... doesn't make it more socialy acceptable to kill anybody. we can allow all forms of fictional entertainment that revolves around a bank theif, but it doesn't make it any more acceptable to actually rob a bank. as far as the culture is concerned, they have every right to live in whatever environment they choose just as much as you and i. they arn't hurting anybody in the way they run their country or the way they live their life. they arn't forcing their way of life on you, so don't force yours on them.

 

I'm curious how the Japanese TFans feel about this. I know that Japan is a lot more liberal with sexuality with the prevalence of adult anime and manga everywhere with porno stores and used underwear selling, which disturbs me.

 

goki answered that. they're more or less "meh"

siburke939: I'm sorry, but since you are refusing to discuss this issue like an objective and rational adult then I simply have nothing further to say to you regarding this particular issue. Thank you.

 

Now ultimately, we need to be asking the question, "is KISS Players hurting anyone?" -- because unless something can be demonstrated as being harmful, then it is arguably covered under freedom of expression.

 

Arguments for the Affirmative

 

First of all, Melissa is drawn in a manner where her age is made to look ambiguous. She could pass for either an older minor or a young adult. It can be argued that this was intentionally done by artist Oshima Yuki in an effort to satiate fanboy lolicon. This is not the first time that Oshima has designed such a character for Transformers - he previously designed the convention exclusive Ai-chan (T-AI) PVC figure from Transformers Car Robot (RiD) - and that character is also drawn with questionable loli, although she has never been portrayed in any obviously sultry positions or situations, outside of TF SPAM doujin.

 

The affirmative argues that although this is all fictituous, like most forms of erotic and pornographic literature, it demeans females. The argument against erotic literature is that it portrays females as being objects of desire for men and diminishes their status as human beings, reducing them to the level of desirable flesh. The affirmative would continue to argue that by drawing Melissa in a manner where her physical age is so subjective, that it is catering to paedophilic fetishes, which not only demeans females, but also targets children.

 

In conclusion, the affirmative argues that this ero-kawa is morally abhorrent for the reasons stated above and ought to be opposed by consumers. Suggested forms of opposition include boycotting the product by simply NOT buying it. If one feels the urge, there is also the option to contact TakaraTomy directly.

 

Arguments for the Negative

 

The argument for the Negative is based on two main points: firstly, that this is after all, completely fictituous and that no real persons are being portrayed or harmed in the creation and distribution of this product. Secondly, that erokawa has a Cathartic effect.

 

Melissa is a fictituous character who only exists as a comic book character and PVC figurine. The Negative would also argue that although Melissa's physical appearance makes her cosmetic age look ambiguous, that her official age is 20 -- regardless of how young she may look, this character is an adult, thus there is NO fictituous portrayal of a minor in an erotic situation. After all, an adult would not be ejected from a bar or dance club based solely on the reason that they "look too young." So long as their proof of age ID checks out, most venues will grant them access. There are fictional books and movies out there that portray violence and death involving minors, yet so long as they are not marketed at young viewers, they are generally accepted.

 

The Negative also argues that erokawa creates a Cathartic effect. Japanese manga and anime has long been criticised by Western audiences for its openess regarding high level violence and sexuality. Yet Japan has the second lowest crime rate in the world, and relatively very little anti-social behaviour committed by members of the public. In Western nations, although we have stricter censorship regulations on our comic books and cartoons, we have higher crime statistics, and also much more widespread public anti-social behaviour. I am currently typing this in an internet cafe - and just seconds ago, some loud drunk guys just walked and shouted at all the patrons here, telling us to stop downloading porn. Around this area we also get a lot of motorheads who like to rev up and down streets with noisy engines and sounds systems - all in what is arguably an infantile form of attention-seeking chest-beating behaviour. I never had this problem when I was living in Japan. The only noisy neighbour I had was from another Gaijin who lived next door.

 

Just last week I saw two men who saw two rather attractive blonde women stepping out of a car. They called out to them and said, "Aw, yous are hot. Are yous sisters? I love blondes!" -- real disgusting chauvinistic behaviour. I've never seen this kind of chauvinism in Japan.

 

Now, whilst the Affirmative may argue that sexism is much more prevalent in Japan, and that erokawa is part of the socio-cultural exploitation of females, the Negative would argue that erokawa is not the cause of this exploitation, but a product of it. In order to really effectively combat Japanese chauvinism, one needs to attack the root underlying social causes of it, primarily through education and changing long-standing social attitudes and cultural values. Japan is still very much a country where a woman's place is behind her man.

 

Below is a copy of an essay which I wrote regarding women's education in Japan.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Education for Japanese Women: A Century of (or lack of) Change

 

In traditional Confucian-based Japanese values, women are merely viewed as objects to be possessed by men for their benefit. In fact, the Japanese language itself contains many elements which inherently demean women. Wives are often addressed by their husbands as oi (“oy!� – it’s not even a word, it’s just a grunt) or kanai, which means “household content,� something arguably comparable with the television set today. A Tokugawa scholar once said that the world is kept in order by the three ‘treasures’ of man; Buddhism, weapons and his wife. To exacerbate this lowering of a woman’s status, wives commonly refer to their husbands as shujin, which literally means “master,� lowering a woman to the level of a slave or domesticated animal. The Japanese phrase, “woman’s wisdom,� refers to shallow thinking and learned women have traditionally been looked down upon. Academic education was traditionally exclusively reserved for men up till the end of the Tokugawa Period. Until then, education was generally something viewed as a necessity for men. Any basis for women’s education was argued with justifications that benefited men, such as teaching domestic skills in order to make them better wives. Although the earlier part of the Meiji Restoration saw an influx of Western ideals and the creation of mandatory education for boys and girls, it was not long before Japan regressed back to Confucian-based morality, where society continued to frown upon higher education for women. It was not until after World War II, under reforms by the U.S.-led Allied Occupation Forces, that higher education became available for women on the same basis as men. However, reforms based on Western ideals of egalitarianism and liberalism have been continually contested by traditional Japanese thinking in the government and society at large. Consequently, dramatic gender-based differences continue to plague education, work and social attitudes in Japan.

Academic education for women was extremely undermined before the Meiji Restoration. During the Tokugawa Dynasty (1603-1868), education for women was effectively restricted to the Samurai class. Rising from Neo-Confucianism, Samurai education placed an emphasis on moral education. For women, Samurai morality meant that they were to be completely subjugated for the benefit of men. Traditional Japanese morality demanded a woman’s selfless obedience to her parents, her husband and to her son in widowhood. Although it was not uncommon for women to hunt on horseback in the time of Tokugawa Ieyasu, a continual era of relative peace led to an exclusive emphasis on domestic virtues. It was generally considered unnecessary for women to engage in any study of classical Chinese literature. Although one scholar argued that women should at least read the Four Books and the Xiaoxue, in order to become more virtuous by being better able to influence the minds of their sons and husbands, this argument is still primarily rooted in the notion that any education or benefit towards women should be based on the greater benefit of men. Women who did read Chinese classics did so in secrecy and would avoid expressing any signs of being well read. Learned and well-spoken women were considered by some scholars as a sign of impending civil disturbance. Women were permitted to acquire some literary skills under the premise of enhancing their femininity. Under the Heian tradition of separate cultures for men and women, each with its own literary language and style, women could study Japanese classics, as opposed to the men who received a Chinese-based education. The study of Japanese literature for women was justified by the notion that it was necessary to make them more refine for social intercourse. Again, we see a recurring pattern that women simply were not allowed to claim any self-centred motivation for wanting to learn. However for the most part, education for women was carried out at home and revolved around the acquisition of domestic skills such as home management, sewing and weaving. Even upper noblewomen were required to undergo domestic education, in spite of the fact that they did not have to do their own domestic chores, as domestic skills were regarded as an essential element of femininity. Such vocational qualities were required for her place as a woman, as women were far more subject to dismissal. Traditional morality warned girls that if they grew up to be selfish, disobedient, disorderly or unable to cook or sew, that they would be divorced. In contrast, a Samurai had to be extremely incompetent in order to be stripped of his hereditary stipend. In the words of the early 20th Century feminist, Hiratsuka Raichou, traditional Japanese morals perpetuated a society where women were “made ignorant, made a slave, (and) made a piece of meat by male selfishness.�

 

After the fall of the Tokugawa regime, the Meiji government (1869-1911) built what would become the basic foundation of modern Japanese education. Reforms which had a great level of influence on women’s higher education. During the Tokugawa Dynasty, Japan was virtually closed to the outside world from 1636-1854, by barely communicating or making contact with other countries. Although this self-imposed isolation allowed domestic culture to flourish, it also caused Japan to fall behind other nations in terms of industrialisation and the development of international relations. When Ishin rebels usurped power from the Tokugawa government, the newly established Meiji government sent scholars and politicians abroad to observe Western countries in order to learn about foreign culture and technology. After observing Western educational systems, Meiji leaders believed that education would be a strong tool in promoting their reforms. Thus they attempted to employ Western knowledge and ethics in the educational system and avoid traditional Japanese values, as they believed that modernisation was dependent upon emulating the West. This definition of modernisation characterised early Meiji (1868 – mid 1870s) military and economic development. In their quest for modernisation, the Meiji government recognised the importance of providing education for boys and girls at a primary level. However during the course of the Meiji Period, the goal of education for women became increasingly perceived as less important that education for men. Consequently the structure and content of education came to reflect this notion. At the primary level, there was relatively equal access for boys and girls. In 1872, the Fundamental Code of Education was promulgated by the newly established Monbusho (Ministry of Education), calling for four years of compulsory education in lower primary school, with an additional four years offered by upper primary school. The content assigned was the same for both boys and girls, including reading, writing and arithmetic. At first, female attendance lagged behind males (30% Vs 63% in 1888) because most parents felt that it was both unnecessary and unfeminine for their daughters to receive education involving areas beyond domestic skills, whereas others also objected to having their daughters taught in a coeducational setting. However the rapidly industralising economic expansion following the Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895) saw an increase in the demand for female workers. As a result, female rates of primary school attendance rose to 90% by 1904. Compulsory education was extended to six years by 1907 and at the end of the Meiji era in 1912, compulsory school attendance was almost universal between boys and girls.

 

1879-1880 saw a distinct turning away from a Western-based liberal school system to a more conservative Confucian-based system emphasising traditional moral education. Consequently, secondary education became increasingly gender differentiated in both structure and content. Sewing and other domestic skills were made a requirement of the elementary curriculum for girls. Secondary coeducation was abolished in 1880 and restricted down to the first three years of primary school in 1892. There was a general ‘unofficial’ social norm that secondary and tertiary education were exclusively for males. In its 1882 annual report, the Monbusho made it clear that education beyond primary level should be differentiated for males and females and that the purpose of female education should be to impart such knowledge as would be helpful to a woman in her destined role as wife and mother. This regression to pre-Meiji values gave rise to the concept of female education known as ryousai kembo no kyouiku (“education for the training of good wives and wise mothers�). Like the prevailing morality of the Tokugawa era, women were still perceived as solely existing for the benefit of men. Girls were formally excluded from public middle schools in 1880, and by 1884, there were no more females enrolled in middle schools. Fundamentally speaking, there is a regression to pre-Meiji concepts of education for females.

 

All post-primary education for women was developed private non-government organisations, such as Christian mission schools. 1882 also saw the government beginning to provide some secondary education for females, with the establishment of a girl’s high school attached to Tokyo Women’s Normal School. Normal school were free education and since the duration of the curriculum had not yet been determined, some students graduated after a year whilst others took a few years to graduate. Schools also did not set application deadlines either. As a result, many young people from poor socio-economic classes (mainly the lower warrior class) went to normal schools to take advantage of a free education and a job upon graduation. However the percentage of female primary school graduates who went on to these schools was very small: about 2% in 1915, less than 5% in 1924 and 10% in 1935. The females who attended these schools mostly came from reasonably affluent urban families or wealthy farm families, and their formal education usually ended upon graduation of normal school. The fact that secondary schools for girls were designated as “higher schools� (‘senior high school’) whereas the same level for boys were known as “middle schools� (‘junior high school’), reflects the general view that the purpose of pursuing higher education was to provide students with professional training in order to pursue careers, thus higher education was considered fundamentally unnecessary for women, thus a secondary-level education was sufficient for women. Consequently, the social and cultural barriers in pre-war Japan remained deeply embedded in Japanese society.

 

On the eve of World War II, about 10% of girls graduating from primary school went onto a girls’ high school. Among those who graduated from high school, less than one in ten ever went onto any sort of tertiary institution. Like most of the girls who attended primary school, the majority of girls who attended girls’ high schools were also from rather affluent families. Dominating social opinion strongly disapproved of women acquiring a higher education. The common argument against further education for women was that academic study would make a young woman conceited, impertinent and forward, thus making it difficult for her to find a master husband, and even if she did marry, she would be disliked by her husband for her pride and conceit. Consequently, women who pursued higher education did so under strong opposition from members of society, including her own parents. It would not be until after the end of World War II that university education would become available for women on the same basis as men.

 

After Japan’s unconditional surrender on September 2, 1945, U.S.-led Allied Occupation Forces arrived in Japan and began rebuilding Japanese society with hopes of recreating it into a democratic and more egalitarian society. During the final years of the war, education was put on hold. Children in metropolitan areas were forced to evacuate to rural villages, as Allied air attacks had leveled many school buildings. Faced with hunger and a lack of housing, education soon came to be viewed as non-essential. On August 28, 1945, the Monbusho encouraged Japanese citizens to reopen their schools. On September 15, 1945, the Monbusho issued the Shin Nippon Kensetsu no Kyouiku Houshin (“Guidelines of Educational Reforms for the Construction of a New Japan�), which set out eleven basic guidelines for educational reforms. These guidelines included changing the contents of textbooks and the quality and effectiveness of school teachers. Although the Japanese government criticised their former military dictatorship, they did not attempt to abolish the emperor’s authority. The guidelines indicated the government’s strong desire to maintain Japanese traditions.

In October 1945, the occupying Allied Forces announced four orders for educational reforms. First was the establishment of a democratic society and the abolition of military dictatorship. The second order was to improve the working conditions for school teachers. The third order called for the separation of Shinto from education, and the final order called for the research of moral education and social studies. These orders were not directly related to women’s education, but to a single tracking educational structure (six years primary, three years junior high, three years senior high and four years of university) similar to that in the United States was adopted and had a significant influence on the improvement of equal educational opportunity. In particular, tertiary institutions including women’s colleges (senmon gakkou), imperial universities, normal schools and high schools were unified on the same level of higher education under the Occupation Forces’ policies. Moreover, coeducation was adopted for all levels of education, and all universities were compelled to open their doors to women. This unification of higher learning institutions and the adaptation of coeducation brought equal access to education and resulted in greater access to higher education for women. Occupation leaders believed that coeducation provided equal opportunity for education, equalisation of educational content, and a more liberal idea of equality between males and females. Accordingly, the education reforms were used to enhance political ends to promote democratisation.

 

In addition, the Monbusho announced the outline of educational reforms for women (Joshi Kyouiku Sasshin Youkou) in December 1945. Under these guidelines, women’s education was to offer equal opportunity in terms of educational content, and coeducation at all levels of education was adopted to accomplish this. In addition, more women’s colleges were required to encourage females to enter higher learning institutions. After the outline of educational reforms for women was announced, the Occupational Allied Civil Information and Education Section (CI&E) started to call for the implementation of equal educational opportunities for males and females. The first U.S. Education Mission was sent in March 1946. The Mission published a report that suggested coeducation at all levels of education. The equalisation of educational opportunity was made law when the Fundamental Law of Education was proclaimed on March 31, 1946. Consequently the Constitution of Japan was decreed on November 3, 1946 and an edict about education was specifically written in Article 26 where, “All people shall have the right to receive an equal education correspondent to their ability, as provided for by law…. All people shall be obligated to have all boys and girls under their protection receive ordinary education as provided for by law. Such compulsory education shall be free.� The basic right of education became guaranteed by the Constitution and the Fundamental Law of Education was established as the centerpiece of educational policy. The American Occupation of Japan and the educational policies it instituted significantly impacted and brought new influences into the Japanese educational system. Japan’s educational system was reformed to bring it more in line with the new constitutional ideals, which were democratic control and egalitarianism. However there were limitations to this goal due to conflicts between the Occupation Forces’ policies and the Japanese government. For example, one committee member for educational reform expressed, “Home economics is the most important type of education for women, and a four-year curriculum is too long. A four-year curriculum is too long for women’s liberal arts� which reflected a long tradition in Japanese education. As a result the Japanese government held a negative attitude toward implementing coeducation. Accordingly, some in the government sought to exclude women from four-year universities by creating a women’s track in higher education. The CI&E observed the Japanese government’s hesitation toward coeducation and eventually decided to take action to legitimate coeducation and decided to implement it through the authority of the occupational force. In 1950, junior colleges were established in order to make educational opportunity a reality for women, since few people could afford four-year schools. Also, for many parents it was simply unacceptable for their daughters to devote such a long time in study; therefore, the establishment of junior colleges was an important national policy in terms of meeting the goal of educational equality for women.

 

Although postwar reforms allowed women to pursue education on an equal basis with men in theory, in reality, the gender-segregated tracks that had existed beyond primary school were consolidated at each level resulting in a single-track structure, with each level qualifying students for the next higher level. Although women’s access and participation in higher education significantly increased after World War II, the pattern of gender differentiation in participation persists. Many educational researchers, and even the Japanese government, have noted significant differences between male and female patterns of participation in four-year universities, where women are underrepresented among the student body, and two-year junior colleges where women constitute the clear majority of students. Clearly the majority of women continue to pursue higher education through junior college rather than through a four-year university experience. Even among those women who entered four-year universities, there was a tendency for women to enter the departments of literature, home economics, and education. No governmental policies, such as affirmative action recently practiced in the United States, had been implemented to deal with this problem, as well as a continual lack of research on women’s education.

 

In contrast, there appears to be little gender differentiation at the compulsory primary and lower secondary levels, where a common, uniform curriculum and programme of study are undertaken by all students in mostly coeducational classrooms. However, gender-related differences begin to become apparent at the upper secondary level. Despite significant increases in the percentage of girls graduating from lower secondary school and staying on to upper secondary (with the rate exceeding that for boys in 1986), there are significant differences in the types of high schools male and female students attend and the subjects they choose, which in turn reflects the different aspirations and expectations regarding tertiary education. Firstly, despite the fact that postwar educational reforms called for the adoption of coeducation at all levels, many students still attend single-sex schools. Over 60% of single-sex schools and the best private schools, are boys’ schools. Secondly, although girls outnumber boys (74%:71% in1986) in general academic high school programme enrolments, few are found in the most prestigious and competitive high schools. Even the best public schools enroll fifty-five boys to forty-five girls. Among those who choose a vocational programme in high school, girls tend to take home economics or commercial studies in preparation for clerical jobs after graduation, whereas boys tend to study more technical subjects. Furthermore, the percentage of students going onto four-year universities is much higher among students who studied technical subjects than commerce or home economics. Gender differences become even more magnified at the tertiary level. Although the number of girls entering postsecondary institutions has fourfolded between 1960 and 1986, a substantial part of that enrolment manifested in increases of enrolments for tanki daigaku, or short term junior colleges. This contrasts the pattern for males, where the most part of tertiary enrolment has been for four-year universities. Although it is possible for junior college students to transfer to universities, very few actually do so. Although female university enrolments have increased slightly in recent years, the proportion is still lagging behind other industrialised nations. Even within the most prestigious universities such as Tokyo University and Kyoto University, women only made up 7 to 8 percent of all enrolled students in 1980. This sharply contrasts with other industrialised nations, such as the United States where women constituted 49% of university undergraduates by 1984. In 1986, women made up about 14% of students enrolled in post-graduate master degrees (compared to 49% in the U.S. at the time) and only 12% are undertaking doctoral studies (compared to 33% in the U.S.). Although absolute numbers and relative proportions of women in universities has increased drastically since the war (only 9% of masters students and 5% of doctoral students were female in 1960), the relatively low rate of female enrolment at universities means that women continue to be a small minority of graduate students. Overall, the degree of gender-based disparity in regard to education participation and subject selection, intensifies as one progresses to higher levels of education, with the least amount of differentiation at primary school level and the most amount of differentiation at the tertiary level.

 

Social attitudes and expectations also play a major role in creating and sustaining participation patterns. Admission to Japanese high schools is based on entrance examinations and high schools are ranked according to their success rate of students who successfully gain entrance to a university. Students aiming to enter the top academic senior high schools begin preparing for entrance exams during junior high by attending special extra-study “cram schools� known as juku, or by hiring a private tutor. By time students reach the second or third year of junior high, many students have already decided what tertiary institution they want to attend. Among the majority of girls, this means junior college, rather than aspiring for university. As a result, junior high school girls are less likely to seek admission in top-ranking senior high schools. Girls are also more likely to enter a private senior high school, often attached to a women’s junior college or university which graduates can enter without undergoing entrance examinations. Aside from the attitudes and personal expectations of students, the attitudes and expectations of parents also plays a major role in participation patterns. Although most parents consider the rigorous preparation, competition and financial cost of gaining admission to a top senior high school and prestigious university to be an inevitable necessity for their sons, they do not consider it as necessary for their daughters. Although recent nationwide surveys indicate that there has been a general rise in the level of education that parents wish for their children of either sex, parents still continue to consider male education to be a higher priority. Though most parents want their daughters to receive at least a senior high school education, they are also more likely to consider sending their daughters to a junior college, whereas parents are more likely to want their sons to enter a four-year university. Lack of ambition amongst and for females continues to be a major hurdle for gender equality in education participation.

 

Furthermore, there are also a gender-related differences in the areas of study women choose. In 1986, 60% of female university students clustered in the traditionally female fields of literature, education and home economics. Other than fields such as teaching and pharmacy, very few women receive training for professional careers. At junior colleges, home economics continues to be the most popular major among the mostly female students. Junior colleges are arguably glorified universities for future housewives (commonly mocked as “Housewife U�). At most women’s universities, the faculties of literature and home economics are the only ones available, since sufficient demand for other subjects simply does not exist. Furthermore, less than a third of women’s universities have post-graduate programmes. This clearly shows that the Tokugawa mentality regarding the role of education for women still lingers on in Japan today. Although this trend is changing, it is doing so very slowly and such trends still dominate Japan today.

 

There is also inequity of women’s participation in the workforce. Women make up 36% of Japan’s workforce, and although the number of employed women outnumbered full-time housewives in 1984, a significant number of this increase has been due to the rise in the number of part-time housewives. One third of working women are part-timers (although many full time working women are labeled as “part timers,� receiving insufficient pay and benefits for the work they do) and most of full time workers are employed for about seven years. Women in the labour force continue to be homemakers before they are career-makers. Even today, only a minority of female university graduates will pursue a career. Over ninety percent of university educated women view work as some form of temporary pursuit until they get married or have children. Therefore, the vast majority of women simply stop working and become housewives rather than having any aspirations of building a career. Another decisive factor which discourages women from enrolling at universities is that the employment opportunities for female university graduates are extremely limited, thus most young women and their parents do not consider a four-year university education to be a worthwhile investment. Till this day, young women in Japan straight out from school are hired on the presumption that they will cease working upon marriage or bearing a child. Women are generally excluded from Japan’s system lifetime employment (as mentioned before, the average working ‘lifespan’ for a woman is seven years) and promotions and wages based on the length of service. Many companies have either a written or unwritten policy that requires women to retire at the time of marriage, maternity or childbirth. Companies often hire senior or junior high school graduates as “office ladies� (OL) to perform clerical duties and other menial tasks such as serving beverages and food for their male counterparts. In many companies, including universities, female staff members are even made to wear aprons as part of their uniform, further enforcing the archaic notion that the woman’s place is truly in the kitchen, even when she is at work. To make things worse, many companies also have a policy of not recruiting female university graduates. Although this blatant form of gender discrimination is actually prohibited by the 1947 Labour Standards Law and the 1985 Equal Employment Opportunity Act, like much of Japan’s anti-discrimination laws, they are inadequately designed and poorly enforced. This shows a general apathy within the Japanese government regarding institutionalised discrimination in the workplace.

 

In recent years many Japanese companies have begun to realise the generally untapped well of talent and skills that is university-educated women. Such companies, particularly financial institutions, now offer female university graduates a choice between the traditional women’s role of being an OL, or undertaking a career path that is generally reserved for male graduates. However, this system is relatively recent and such companies who adopt such policies are exceptions, not the norm. Even within such companies, the vast majority of women still choose the traditional (and frankly demeaning) work of the “OL,� due to archaic social pressures and fears of becoming unmarriageable. Aside from institutionalised corporate discrimination, career-minded women can also be un-welcomed by their other female colleagues. For example, if there was only one woman working in a particular field, it was easier for her to maintain her clientele since she was a unique employee. With other women entering the same field, the pioneer woman may feel threatened by this personally unprecedented competition. Status-based conflicts are also another source of resentment among women in a company.

 

However, amongst this darkness there appears to be some glimmer of hope. An increasing number of female university students today are expressing a desire to pursue careers even after having children. Consequently, they are looking to universities to provide them with specialised job-related expertise and training, including fields that are traditionally male dominated. However, a 1982 survey shows that the number of women who cite career building as their primary motive for university study is still a minority at 29%.

 

In finishing, although access and participation of females in education has significantly increased since the Meiji Restoration, and even more so after the U.S.-based education reforms following the end of World War II, Japanese society at large still views higher education as being unimportant. In spite of notable liberal progress for women, even today, the woman’s place is still view as being “in the kitchen.� The majority of women still enroll at junior colleges rather than universities where most of them study domestic skills. This clearly indicates that the notion that education for women should only be to better prepare them as better wives and mothers that dominated pre-Meiji times, is still inherent in Japanese society today. Even the majority of women still view their role as being homemakers, with a distinct minority ever intended to work a career. Essentially, all the factors hindering gender-based equality in Japanese society can be ultimately traced to the aforementioned pre-Meiji ideology regarding women. If the feminist movement is to have any hope of catching up with other industralised nations, fundamental social attitudes regarding the role of women in society must be changed. Japan must strive to become a more egalitarian society based more on notions of equality, rather than perpetuating a society that solely benefits men at the expense of women, who are still fundamentally seen as existing to serve men, as demonstrated in the Japanese corporate system of “OL.� This also includes the way women view themselves. Japanese women in general need to become more ambitious and overcome demeaning traditional values regarding women in order to better strive for an equal basis with men.

 

© 2001 Kelvin Chan (Goktimus Prime). Do not reproduce without permission.

joshlowe'd