Connect with us

The Bridge

Japanese women have long sacrificed their surnames in marriage − politics and demographics might change that

Published

on

Last Updated on May 14, 2025 by Rod Washington

Japanese women

A record number of female candidates stood in the 2024 Japanese election.
Richard A. Brooks/AFP via Getty Images

Linda E. White, Middlebury For centuries, women entering marriage in Japan have been bound by the Confucian notion of personal sacrifice for the good of the family – and that has extended to their names. Encouraged by a sexual double standard and shaped by a general perception of Japan as a society made for men, most women abandon their maiden names when tying the knot. The law doesn’t give them much leeway on the issue. Since 1947, Japanese Civil Code has stipulated that all married couples must share a common surname. Although in theory that name could be that of the husband or wife, in practice it is almost always the man’s. Indeed, around 95% of all marriages in Japan are registered under a husband’s surname. But there are signs that things could be changing. A 2025 Jiji Press survey found that a rising percentage of lawmakers – about 44% – back a system that would allow for dual surnames. This, along with Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba’s stated openness to a selective separate surname option, has given fresh hope that married women will be able to keep their names. As a scholar of gender relations and family law in Japan, I know a change would be welcomed by many across the nation. In interviews carried out during the past 15 years, many women have told me of their strong desire to keep their maiden names.

Barriers to change

Today, around 60% of Japanese people – both men and women alike – approve of a change in the law to allow husbands and wives to have separate surnames. But to date, lawmakers have failed in their attempts to change a Civil Code that is seemingly at odds with the Constitution, which guarantees equality between men and women and between a husband and wife in marriage. The main barrier has been the conservative Liberal Democratic Party, or LDP, which has been in power for much of the post-World War II era. LDP lawmakers have repeatedly squashed proposals, stating that a legal change would threaten the traditional family structure. Since Japan’s Supreme Court in a 2015 decision sent the question of separate surnames back to the National Diet, the LDP has prevented legislation from reaching the parliamentary floor. But despite a largely male and conservative legislature, the government is facing increasing pressure from opposition members in parliament, who argue that separate surnames should be permitted in marriage. In Ishiba, the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party as well as the country’s leader, they finally have a powerful ally on the LDP side of the ledger.

What’s in a name?

In Japan, a surname links a woman, or a man, to siblings, parents and grandparents, as well as to the places where their ancestors lived and worked. It’s a meaningful part of one’s identity. As a married woman I interviewed told me: “When they call me by my husband’s name at the bank, I feel they are referring to someone else. It doesn’t feel like me.” A woman in a hard hat works with a robotic arm.A woman technician checks a robot arm on the assembly line in Kitakyushu, Japan. Katsumi Kasahara/Gamma-Rapho via Getty ImagesBut beyond the symbolism and sense of identity, changing a surname has broader social consequences, especially in the workplace. The average age at marriage in Japan is 29.7 for women and 31 for men. By the time many women marry, they have been in the workforce for 10 or more years and have developed a professional identity using their maiden names. In Japan, work relationships are usually conducted using last names. As one interviewee explained to me: “We just don’t use first names at work in Japan.” Another interviewee said she wanted to have the same ease as her husband after marriage, to continue her profession with her own name. Contacting clients, co-workers, administrators and bosses about a name change draws attention to private matters that would not necessarily be discussed at work, she said. The concern among some women I spoke with is that once alerted to the change in marital status, bosses and colleagues will no longer take their commitment to the job as seriously as they did when they were single. Such feelings reveal the negative impact that marriage often has on a woman’s career – an effect some hope to avoid by not telling co-workers and clients of their changed status.

Demographic time bomb

Conservative lawmakers decry a change of the surname rule in the Civil Code as an attack on traditional values and tie it to concerns over a looming demographic crisis. They argue that Japan must work to maintain the traditional family system and to encourage more marriages and babies. Certainly, Japan is facing a demographic crisis. With a fertility rate of around 1.2 babies per woman, Japan has one of the world’s oldest and fastest-shrinking populations. But Japanese scholars have argued that if women had more equality in the workplace, and at home, they would be more likely to choose to have children and continue working. Sociologist Aya Ezawa noted in 2019 that “a culture of long work hours, combined with a persistent gendered division of labour in the home, and high expectations toward motherhood mean that work and family remain very difficult to combine for women in contemporary Japan.” Former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, also a conservative LDP member, encouraged higher employment for women – married or unmarried – to help grow the Japanese economy in the early part of the 21st century. But his “Womenomics” plan bore little fruit. Without more policies addressing unequal treatment in the workplace, many educated and dedicated female workers will continue to be routed into dead-end jobs as their elder male bosses wait in vain for them to leave the workforce to have children. A woman poses for a wedding photo shoot in front of cherry blossom trees.The vast majority of Japanese women give up their surnames upon marriage. Philip Fong/AFP via Getty Images

Finding a balance

Certainly, changing the surname rule will prove a major turn in Japan’s progress toward gender equality. The Civil Code limiting married couples to one surname is inextricably linked to the 150-year-old “modern” koseki, or household register, system. A single surname for each family is a central pillar of the koseki – recalling an era when a male head of household was responsible for not only key family financial and marital decisions but also the family name. For many older Japanese, the koseki stands in for the family itself. If someone is listed in a koseki, through notification of birth, adoption or marriage, they are legally and symbolically part of the family and share a surname. Invoking this tradition, some conservative lawmakers have argued that a multiple surname system is unworkable. Yet advocates of the change say that modern digitization of all koseki records means that there is no real logistical challenge to having dual surname households. And, clearly, many in Japan are ready to recognize that a family with two surnames is still a family. Moreover, many Japanese believe greater gender equality in the workplace will have a positive effect not only on the low birth rate, but on many other aspects of life, too. At present, elder care, child care and community participation tend to be left to people without jobs or with flexible jobs – in other words, mostly women. And Japanese workplaces have failed to adopt flexible work hours that would allow full-time employees to take on more family and community roles.

More women in parliament

In the end, popular support and political necessity may play a role in changing the surname law. It is clear from the latest surveys that more and more voters in Japan are in favor of loosening the one-surname rule. And despite still being underrepresented in politics, women are increasingly taking up political positions in Japan – last year’s election saw a record number of female candidates and a record number elected. Given those currents, Ishiba may need to convince more in his party that the time has come to accept social change and embrace a woman’s choice of surname. If not, his party may lose the dominant position in parliament it has enjoyed for most of the past 70 years.The Conversation Linda E. White, Professor of Japanese Studies, Middlebury This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Author


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading
Advertisement Sports Research

Urbanism

The Building That Proved Los Angeles Could Go Vertical

Los Angeles once banned skyscrapers, yet City Hall broke the height limit and proved high-rise buildings could be engineered safely in an earthquake zone.

Published

on

Los Angeles once banned skyscrapers, yet City Hall broke the height limit and proved high-rise buildings could be engineered safely in an earthquake zone.
LA City Hall. Image Credit: TNC Network & Envato

How City Hall Quietly Undermined LA’s Own Height Limits

The Knowledge Series | STM Daily News

For more than half a century, Los Angeles enforced one of the strictest building height limits in the United States. Beginning in 1905, most buildings were capped at 150 feet, shaping a city that grew outward rather than upward.

The goal was clear: avoid the congestion, shadows, and fire dangers associated with dense Eastern cities. Los Angeles sold itself as open, sunlit, and horizontal — a place where growth spread across land, not into the sky.

And yet, in 1928, Los Angeles City Hall rose to 454 feet, towering over the city like a contradiction in concrete.

It wasn’t built to spark a commercial skyscraper boom.
But it ended up proving that Los Angeles could safely build one.


A Rule Designed to Prevent a Manhattan-Style City

The original height restriction was rooted in early 20th-century fears:

  • Limited firefighting capabilities
  • Concerns over blocked sunlight and airflow
  • Anxiety about congestion and overcrowding
  • A strong desire not to resemble New York or Chicago

Los Angeles wanted prosperity — just not vertical density.

The height cap reinforced a development model where:

  • Office districts stayed low-rise
  • Growth moved outward
  • Automobiles became essential
  • Downtown never consolidated into a dense core

This philosophy held firm even as other American cities raced upward.


How Los Angeles City Hall Proved Skyscrapers Could Be Built Safely

Why City Hall Was Never Meant to Change the Rules

City Hall was intentionally exempt from the height limit because the law applied primarily to private commercial buildings, not civic monuments.

But city leaders were explicit about one thing:
City Hall was not a precedent.

It was designed to:

  • Serve as a symbolic seat of government
  • Stand alone as a civic landmark
  • Represent stability, authority, and modern governance
  • Avoid competing with private office buildings

In effect, Los Angeles wanted a skyline icon — without a skyline.


Innovation Hidden in Plain Sight

What made City Hall truly significant wasn’t just its height — it was how it was built.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

At a time when seismic science was still developing, City Hall incorporated advanced structural ideas for its era:

  • A steel-frame skeleton designed for flexibility
  • Reinforced concrete shear walls for lateral strength
  • A tapered tower to reduce wind and seismic stress
  • Thick structural cores that distributed force instead of resisting it rigidly

These choices weren’t about aesthetics — they were about survival.


The Earthquake That Changed the Conversation

In 1933, the Long Beach earthquake struck Southern California, causing widespread damage and reshaping building codes statewide.

Los Angeles City Hall survived with minimal structural damage.

This moment quietly reshaped the debate:

  • A tall building had endured a major earthquake
  • Structural engineering had proven effective
  • Height alone was no longer the enemy — poor design was

City Hall didn’t just survive — it validated a new approach to vertical construction in seismic regions.


Proof Without Permission

Despite this success, Los Angeles did not rush to repeal its height limits.

Cultural resistance to density remained strong, and developers continued to build outward rather than upward. But the technical argument had already been settled.

City Hall stood as living proof that:

  • High-rise buildings could be engineered safely in Los Angeles
  • Earthquakes were a challenge, not a barrier
  • Fire, structural, and seismic risks could be managed

The height restriction was no longer about safety — it was about philosophy.


The Ironic Legacy

When Los Angeles finally lifted its height limit in 1957, the city did not suddenly erupt into skyscrapers. The habit of building outward was already deeply entrenched.

The result:

  • A skyline that arrived decades late
  • Uneven density across the region
  • Multiple business centers instead of one core
  • Housing and transit challenges baked into the city’s growth pattern

City Hall never triggered a skyscraper boom — but it quietly made one possible.


Why This Still Matters

Today, Los Angeles continues to wrestle with:

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage
  • Housing shortages
  • Transit-oriented development debates
  • Height and zoning battles near rail corridors
  • Resistance to density in a growing city

These debates didn’t begin recently.

They trace back to a single contradiction: a city that banned tall buildings — while proving they could be built safely all along.

Los Angeles City Hall wasn’t just a monument.
It was a test case — and it passed.

Further Reading & Sources


More from The Knowledge Series on STM Daily News

View recent photos

Unlock fun facts & lost history—get The Knowledge in your inbox!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

small business

When TV Talks About Gentrification and Shopping Local — and Where It Gets It Right (and Wrong)

A closer look at how the TV show The Neighborhood tackles gentrification and shopping local—and where the reality of online sales and small business survival is more complex.

Published

on

a buy local signage. A closer look at how the TV show The Neighborhood tackles gentrification and shopping local—and where the reality of online sales and small business survival is more complex.
Photo by RDNE Stock project on Pexels.com

In our continuing look at how entertainment—television, movies, and streaming shows—grapples with real-world issues, this time we turn our attention to gentrification and the often-repeated call to “shop local.” Once again, we examine how popular culture frames these conversations, this time through the CBS sitcom The Neighborhood and the episode “Welcome Back to What Used to Be the Neighborhood.”

A Familiar Story: When the Neighborhood Changes

In the episode, Calvin’s favorite longtime restaurant closes its doors and is replaced by a flashy new pet spa. To Calvin, the change symbolizes something much bigger than a single business closing—it represents the slow erosion of the neighborhood he knows and loves. In response, he launches a campaign urging friends and neighbors to buy local in order to protect small businesses from disappearing.

Emotionally, the episode hits home. Many communities across the country have watched beloved neighborhood institutions vanish, replaced by businesses that feel disconnected from the area’s history and culture. In that sense, The Neighborhood gets something very right: gentrification often shows up one storefront at a time.

Where Television Simplifies a Complicated Reality

But, as is often the case with television, the episode also simplifies a much more complex economic reality.

The show frames “shopping local” as a direct alternative to shopping online, subtly suggesting that online platforms are inherently harmful to small businesses. In real life, however, the line between “local” and “online” is no longer so clear.

Many local and small businesses now survive precisely because they sell online—through their own websites, through Amazon, or through other platforms that support independent sellers. For some, online sales are not a threat to local commerce; they are a lifeline.

Why Brick-and-Mortar Isn’t Always Sustainable

Rising costs are a major factor driving these changes. Commercial leases, insurance premiums, utilities, staffing costs, and local fees have all increased dramatically in many cities. For small business owners, keeping a physical storefront open can become financially impossible—even when customer support remains strong.

As a result, some businesses choose to close their brick-and-mortar locations while continuing to operate online. Others scale back to pop-ups, shared spaces, or hybrid models. These businesses may no longer have a traditional storefront, but they are still local—employing local workers, paying local taxes, and serving their communities in new ways.

The Real Issue Behind “Shop Local”

Where The Neighborhood succeeds is in capturing the emotional truth of gentrification: the sense of loss, displacement, and cultural change that comes with rising rents and shifting demographics.

Where it misses the mark is in suggesting that consumer choices alone—simply avoiding online shopping—can solve the problem.

The real challenges facing local and small businesses go far beyond individual buying habits. They include zoning policies, commercial rent practices, corporate consolidation, and economic systems that increasingly favor scale over community presence.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage
Visit: https://stmdailynews.com/stm-daily-news-pop-culture-fact-check-do-electric-cars-have-fuses/

A Conversation Worth Having—Even If TV Can’t Finish It

The Neighborhood deserves credit for bringing these issues into mainstream conversation. It sparks discussion, even if it wraps a complicated topic in a sitcom-friendly moral lesson.

The reality is messier. Supporting local businesses today often means rethinking what “local” looks like in a digital economy—and recognizing that survival sometimes requires adaptation, not nostalgia.

Further Reading & External Resources

At STM Daily News, our Local and Small Business coverage continues to explore these real-world dynamics beyond the TV screen, highlighting the challenges, innovations, and resilience of the businesses that keep communities alive—whether their doors are on Main Street or their storefronts live online.

📍 Read more Local and Small Business coverage at: STM Daily News

Author

  • Rod Washington

    Rod: A creative force, blending words, images, and flavors. Blogger, writer, filmmaker, and photographer. Cooking enthusiast with a sci-fi vision. Passionate about his upcoming series and dedicated to TNC Network. Partnered with Rebecca Washington for a shared journey of love and art. View all posts


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

The Knowledge

Metro Board Advances Sepulveda Transit Corridor as C Line South Bay Extension Remains Under Review

The Los Angeles Metro Board meeting addressed progress on two key rail projects: the approved underground Sepulveda Transit Corridor, enhancing regional connectivity, and the debated extension of the Metro C Line into the South Bay, which remains undecided.

Published

on

The LA Metro Board approved the Sepulveda Transit Corridor’s underground rail plan while continuing debate over the C Line extension into the South Bay. Here’s what it means for LA transit’s future.
Image Credit: LA Metro

The future of Los Angeles transit was the focus of a recent Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Board meeting, where directors considered progress on two major rail projects: the Sepulveda Transit Corridor and the long-planned extension of the Metro C Line into the South Bay.

STC LPA scaled 1
Image Credit: LA Metro

While the meeting resulted in a decisive vote on one project, the other continues to generate debate among Metro officials, local cities, and residents.

Sepulveda Transit Corridor: Underground Heavy Rail Moves Forward

The Metro Board unanimously approved the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) for the Sepulveda Transit Corridor, marking a major milestone for a project that has been discussed for decades.

The approved alternative calls for a fully underground heavy rail subway connecting the San Fernando Valley to the Westside, running from the Van Nuys Metrolink Station to the Metro E Line’s Expo/Sepulveda Station. The line would pass beneath the Sepulveda Pass, UCLA, and other high-demand travel areas.

Metro officials emphasized that the underground alignment offers the fastest travel times, highest passenger capacity, and the fewest surface-level impacts when compared with earlier aerial or monorail alternatives. The project is expected to significantly reduce congestion along the 405 Freeway corridor and improve regional connectivity.

With the LPA now selected, the Sepulveda Transit Corridor advances toward final environmental clearance, engineering, and eventual construction — a process that will continue over the coming years.

Metro C Line Extension: South Bay Alignment Debate Continues

The Board also discussed the Metro C Line extension into the South Bay, a project intended to extend light rail service approximately 4.5 miles from the current Redondo Beach station to the Torrance Transit Center.

Metro has released the project’s Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), which incorporates years of technical analysis and public input. However, unlike the Sepulveda project, the Board did not take final action to certify the FEIR or formally adopt a locally preferred alignment at this meeting.

Hawthorne Boulevard vs. Metro Right-of-Way

At the center of the C Line discussion is the question of alignment.

Metro staff has identified a “hybrid” alignment using an existing Metro-owned rail right-of-way as the preferred option. This route would largely follow the historic Harbor Subdivision corridor, minimizing new street disruptions while blending at-grade, elevated, and below-grade segments.

Some South Bay cities, however, continue to advocate for a Hawthorne Boulevard alignment, which would place rail tracks within the median of the busy commercial corridor. Supporters argue it offers better street-level access, while Metro has cited higher costs, longer construction timelines, and greater traffic impacts as key concerns.

Metro officials indicated that additional coordination with local jurisdictions and further Board action will be needed before a final decision is made.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

What This Means for LA Transit

The contrast between the two projects was clear at the meeting: the Sepulveda Transit Corridor is now firmly on a defined path forward, while the C Line extension remains in a critical decision-making phase.

Together, the projects highlight both the ambition and complexity of expanding transit in Los Angeles County — balancing regional mobility goals, neighborhood impacts, and long-term funding realities.

Further Reading & Official Project Information


Metro Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project Page

– Official Metro overview of the Sepulveda Pass project, including alternatives, maps, timelines, and environmental documents.

Metro Board Considers Locally Preferred Alternative for Sepulveda Corridor

– Metro’s summary of the Board action and rationale behind selecting the underground heavy rail option.

Metro C Line Extension to Torrance Project Page

– Background, station concepts, and status updates for the South Bay light rail extension.

Final Environmental Impact Report: C Line Extension

– Details on the Final EIR, public comments, and next steps toward Board certification.

Metro Project Updates – The Source

– Ongoing Metro blog updates covering major transit projects, board actions, and construction milestones.

LA Metro Board of Directors

– Information on Metro Board members, meeting schedules, agendas, and voting records.

STM Daily News will continue to follow both projects closely, providing updates as Metro moves toward final approvals, construction timelines, and funding decisions that will shape how Angelenos travel for decades to come.

For ongoing coverage of Metro projects, transportation policy, and infrastructure across Southern California, visit STM Daily News.


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

Trending