An examination of Japan’s 121st-place ranking in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report 2020, clarifying what the index actually measures and questioning whether international rankings can capture the real social influence, freedom, and strength of Japanese women.

July 9, 2020
【Background】
The following is a republication of an article originally published on May 2, 2020, under the title: “Why, then, do socially influential Japanese women not seek political office? Because today’s politicians must constantly endure the abuse of opposition parties filled with hypocrisy and malice. Japanese women would rather leave such work to their husbands and live as they please.”
The article quoted a column by Masayuki Takayama titled “A Model Female Legislator,” published at the end of the April 30, 2020 issue of Shukan Shincho.
In the column, Takayama discusses the World Economic Forum, the Global Gender Gap Index, the social position of Japanese women, religion and relations between the sexes, and the qualities required of female politicians, using his characteristic historical interpretation and sharp satire.
Several factual points should be clarified before republication.
The World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index 2020 did not rank the individual ability, happiness, freedom or cultural influence of women.
It measured the remaining gaps between men and women in four areas: economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment.
Japan ranked 121st out of 153 countries, while South Korea ranked 108th.
This does not mean that Japanese women themselves ranked 121st in social status, or that Japanese women were inherently inferior to South Korean women.
Nor did the index directly classify white and non-white countries or rank them according to racial superiority.
Takayama’s language should therefore be read as a polemical criticism of whether international institutions treat Western forms of political participation and social organization as universal standards.
It is also a confirmed fact that journalist Daisuke Tsuda was selected as a World Economic Forum Young Global Leader in 2013.
As Minister of Justice, Yoko Kamikawa authorized the execution of two prisoners in 2017, including one who had been nineteen at the time of his crimes, and in 2018 authorized the executions of former leaders of Aum Shinrikyo.
The following statements concerning historical relations between men and women, religion and individual politicians are presented as Takayama’s commentary, metaphor and satire.
【A Model Female Legislator】
The World Economic Forum, which emerged near the end of the twentieth century, has an aspect resembling a gathering of the children of globalism.
At its annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, figures such as Angela Merkel, Bill Gates and Xi Jinping appear alongside representatives of wealthy nongovernmental organizations.
That year, a young climate activist supported by such organizations appeared and delivered a stern warning.
Yet, to borrow the words of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, it remained the familiar gathering where participants “drink champagne with billionaires.”
An earlier incident in which United States Trade Representative Mickey Kantor reportedly became intoxicated, fell from an upper floor and missed the conference symbolized the character of the event.
The forum also selects and honors people whom it considers future leaders in various countries.
Daisuke Tsuda was one of the Japanese people selected.
Among Japanese observers, some joked that, if a man with dyed blond hair was to be selected, the entertainer Kazlaser might have been the better choice.
The World Economic Forum also publishes a statistical ranking of gender gaps in different countries.
In the report then current, Japan ranked 121st among 153 countries.
South Korea ranked 108th.
One of the principal reasons for Japan’s low position was the relatively small number of female politicians, cabinet ministers and legislators.
Yet many Japanese politicians are unable to oppose their own wives at home.
A ranking that ignores the realities of Japanese society since the age of the sun goddess Amaterasu and concentrates heavily on the number of female politicians deserves scrutiny.
The Asahi Shimbun, however, treated the ranking as a major national disgrace.
Editorial writer Shinji Fukushima wrote in a Sunday column that men drive out prominent women and that the Asahi itself had crushed capable female reporters.
Why had the men at the Asahi continued to discriminate against women?
Fukushima cited an observation by Virginia Woolf to the effect that it gives men great confidence to believe that half of humanity is naturally inferior to them.
He suggested that the men of the newspaper had discriminated against women with this attitude.
Takayama argues, however, that both Woolf and Fukushima misunderstood the deeper history.
Men were not naturally superior to women.
Human society, like animal society, was originally organized around maternal selection.
Women sought men with the strength to defeat enemies and hunt successfully, so that strong qualities would be passed to future generations.
Ordinary or weaker men might never be chosen.
Yet male desire remained powerful.
According to Takayama’s satirical theory, men who could not otherwise be selected developed religion.
Many religions, he argues, emphasize the authority of husbands and the chastity of wives.
Society was transformed from one in which women selected men into one in which men selected women and wives were required to remain loyal to one husband.
Religion may have interrupted natural selection, but it enabled previously unchosen men to find partners.
Takayama points to veiling customs in Jewish and Middle Eastern traditions, the biblical story of Abraham, Sarah and Hagar, severe penalties for adultery in parts of the Islamic world, and traditional Hindu expectations that wives serve their husbands.
Through religion and social institutions, men established a position of superiority over women.
The male-dominated world described by Woolf developed in this way.
Japan’s Shinto tradition, Takayama argues, remained distinctive because it preserved a female-centered sacred tradition symbolized by Amaterasu.
Neither the World Economic Forum nor the Asahi Shimbun understood this Japanese history and culture.
Why, then, do Japanese women, who often exercise substantial practical influence, not seek political office?
Modern politicians must constantly endure abusive accusations and partisan attacks.
Many women may reasonably decide to leave such work to their husbands and live their own lives freely.
The wife of a prime minister may be one illustration.
When a woman does choose political life, however, she may display the determination of Yoko Kamikawa.
As Minister of Justice, Kamikawa authorized the executions of former Aum Shinrikyo leaders and of a prisoner who had been a juvenile at the time of his crimes.
Takayama regarded this as a degree of resolve that many male politicians might lack.
Kiyomi Tsujimoto also became a legislator, but Takayama judged her political purpose differently.
He harshly criticized her past conviction in a case involving publicly funded secretarial salaries.
She later returned to elected office.
Her subsequent political career should be judged by voters on the basis of specific achievements and conduct.
Takayama also criticized Renho for continuing to concentrate on the controversy surrounding the prime minister’s cherry-blossom viewing event when Japan should have been preparing for the dangers of the coronavirus.
He further argued that, given her family’s historical connections with China, she should have warned the Japanese people more clearly about the danger of the outbreak.
Any allegation that a particular politician maintains an improper relationship with the Chinese Communist Party, however, requires concrete evidence.
There is little value in increasing the number of women in parliament if numbers become the sole objective and ability, responsibility and achievement are ignored.
Women should neither be praised merely for being women nor rejected because they are women.
The proper question is whether a politician can protect the lives and property of the people and accept responsibility for difficult decisions.
In that sense, if raising Japan’s ranking means merely increasing the number of female legislators regardless of quality, Japan need not pursue the World Economic Forum’s ranking for its own sake.
【Editorial Note on Republication】
The Global Gender Gap Index is not meaningless.
It provides important evidence that gaps remain between men and women in Japanese politics, corporate management, wages and opportunities for advancement.
At the same time, it does not directly measure women’s happiness, authority within families, control of household property, influence over consumption, cultural authority or freedom in daily life.
A country with many female legislators does not automatically guarantee freedom or happiness for all women.
Formal representation and practical social influence are not identical.
Japanese women have long exercised significant influence in families, education, consumption, culture and local communities.
Japan should therefore neither dismiss international rankings entirely nor submit to them uncritically.
It should examine precisely what each index measures and what it leaves unmeasured.
Japan should also create political conditions in which capable women can exercise their abilities.
A political culture marked by personal abuse, factional obedience, excessive working hours and difficulty in maintaining family life discourages capable people of both sexes.
The objective should not be to increase the number of women as a statistical exercise.
It should be to elect people, regardless of sex, who are prepared to accept grave responsibility and explain their decisions to the public.
International rankings are only one source of information.
Japan does not need to surrender final authority over the value of its society to wealthy participants, activists, international officials or media organizations gathered in Davos.