Considering Gender Equality – What is Equality ?
In recent years, we often hear claims such as: “Japan has few female members of the Diet and local governments”, “Japan has few female corporate executives”, and “There are few females in certain universities (faculties). ”
Indeed, some companies have increased the number of female executives in response to this trend.
When making such claims, we want you to consider the following:
• Should opportunities be equal ?
• Should the number of outcomes be the same (equal) ?
The aforementioned discussion seems to suggest that “the number of outcomes should be same (equal).”
Do you believe this claim represents true gender equality ?
Should opportunities be equal ? (the equality of opportunity)
We believe this equality is important. That is why people on the same playing field should be given the same opportunities.
In the past, Japanese companies would recruit by gender, such as how many men and how many women, in their job postings. This was because companies defined job types based on gender. Today, gender distinctions have disappeared across all occupations and job types.
Additionally, the terminology for nurses differed by gender, with female nurses called “kangyōfu” (nurse) and male nurses called “kangyōshi” (nurse). However, prompted by the push for political correctness, the terminology was unified to the gender-neutral term “kangyōshi” (nurse). Currently, the number of male nurses is increasing.
However, leadership theory includes the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory.
This theory describes how leaders do not treat all subordinates the same, but rather build different relationships with each subordinate, and how this affects individual subordinates and the organization.Groups with strong leader-subordinate(member) relationships are called in-groups, while those with weak relationships are called out-groups. It is noteworthy that subordinates belonging to the in-group tend to be promoted more easily than those in the out-group.
This is just our guess, but wouldn’t you agree that such cases are common not only in private companies but also in government agencies ?
It’s a reality that there are still challenges regarding the equality of opportunity.
When it comes to the equality of opportunity, there are careful considerations regarding criteria and coercion.
Regarding coercion, it is absolutely unacceptable to force someone to do something they do not want to do simply because of an emphasis on the equality of opportunity.
Regarding criteria, even when providing the equality of opportunity, criteria may sometimes be necessary. For example, obtaining a license or qualification is the criterion for professions like doctors or lawyers.
As an aside, the national sport of sumo wrestling has a tradition of “women not allowed on the ring.” There was an incident where a Sumo Association official repeatedly told a woman who was providing emergency medical assistance, “Please step off the ring.”
It is time to reconsider such traditions in emergency situations. Of course, normally, respecting tradition is a Japanese tradition.
There’s no need to listen to the opinions of the “extreme left-wing UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women” who impose their own views as the only justice without even researching the historical background.
Should the number of outcomes be the same (equal) ? (the equality of outcome)
As mentioned in the section on the equality of opportunity, I believe it is acceptable if the same number of people are selected when given equal opportunities and judged by the same criteria.
However, if intentional adjustments are made during selection to achieve the same number of outcomes, this results in unequal treatment of those who gained the opportunity. In other words, the number of outcomes is deliberate, and while claiming equality of outcomes, it actually treats people unequally.
This might be an extreme example, but to achieve the same number of outcomes (the equality of outcome), it could even mean passing individuals with lower scores on entrance exams.
Some self-identified feminists claim that because there are few female Diet members, it’s unequal.
These people are suggesting that female candidates should be elected without elections, correct ?
We don’t understand the equality these people are talking about.
The electoral system already provides the equality of opportunity to be a candidate. If weI had to point out a problem, we think it’s that few women want to become Diet members.
Previously, a comedian posted that “democracy is over” when his preferred candidate lost an election.In other words, this comedian was saying that elections aren’t democratic, and that electing a specific candidate is democracy.
This discussion is very similar, but demanding equality based on outcomes is extremely dangerous.
If equality is to be claimed, it should be based on the premise that the process contains no deliberate manipulation.
Reference: BBC NEWS (2024/02/11)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-43652428
Reference: the japantimes (2024/02/11)
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/04/30/national/social-issues/banning-women-sumo-ring-sexism-centuries-old-cultural-tradition/
Reference: the japan times (2025/12/10)
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2025/01/30/japan/japan-un-imperial-law
Thanks.
2024/02/11 – 2025/12/14