subindex

Buraku Problem Basic

Variety of information that gives you a whole picture of Buraku problem

What is Buraku Problem?

Basic terminologies

Discriminatory incidents
(under construction)

Buraku-related Statistics
(under construction)

People

FAQ

Buraku Problem Basic

Marriage Discrimination

“Marriage discrimination” refers to any action of refusal or cancellation of marriage at the time of engagement or marriage due to the potential partner’s academic or family background, his or her social standing, the presence of a disability, or an ethnic difference. Typically other, more euphemistic reasons are given to justify the refusal or cancellation. There are also cases, post-marriage, of resistance and obstruction, potentially leading to the dissolution of the relationship. The marriage partner him or herself might be the one who does the resisting, but it is not uncommon that third parties such as that person’s family or relatives are the ones who resist the union.

Focusing on the case of Buraku discrimination, historically within Japan’s status caste society, marriage was typically limited to individuals of the same status background, and marriage between individuals of differing status backgrounds was not officially permitted. Looking at the marriage records and the general consciousness of people of that time, there are almost no examples of cross-status marriages. However, with the Emancipation Edict of 1871, the status system was formally abolished. Japan’s post-World War II constitution explicitly addresses “freedom of marriage” as a basic human right: article 24, section 1 states, “Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes…” and section 2 continues, “With regard to choice of spouse…, laws shall be enacted from the standpoint of individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes.” Refusal or cancellation of engagement or marriage on the basis of a person’s Buraku origins, which serves as a continuation of the old status system, must be recognized as a violation of these constitutional stipulations and a violation of basic human rights. Before War World II, there had been a case in which “kidnapping law” had been used to prosecute a person of Buraku origin who married another Japanese person not of Buraku origin as they married without telling the other that he/she was of Buraku origin, but later it was found (Note: the status system had already been abolished at this time and thus it was not necessary to tell their old status). This case, now known as “Takamatsu Case of Discrimination,” became a large social issue at the time. More recently, though, the courts have officially recognized the rejection of marriage due to potential partner’s Buraku origins as highly discriminatory and unconstitutional, and have awarded the plaintiff damages (1983.3.28 Osaka Court Decision). However, cases in which people have actually made an appeal to courts or to other third parties against the discrimination that they face, and thereby rendered themselves apparent, are the exception to the rule. These apparent cases are but the tip of the iceberg.

There are multiple additional reasons for the presence of such a strong desire to avoid marriage. For example, despite post-war revisions in civil law that formally dismantled the family household system, there remains a strong sentiment of household preservation, and this “household consciousness” ties into what might be called a new status system, based on lineage or family pedigree (the common, present-day practice of announcing weddings as the merging “X family and Y family” serves as a good example of this tendency). This sentiment points to an extant effect of the status system: namely, that the families that are joined through the marriage of two individuals become “partnered,” and if one marries someone from a Buraku, then that person’s own family (including relatives) faces the possibility of discrimination. In other words, this discriminatory attitude, which is based on a desire to exclude certain people from one’s in-group, is particularly pronounced when it comes to marriage, which can be thought of as the strongest of human relations. Furthermore, this type of line of thought gains strength in a social structure, such as that of Japanese society, in which there is already a prevalent tendency to accede to public opinion and act accordingly.

Originally, in a time when there was a large distinction between Buraku and non-Buraku neighborhoods in realms of life, standards of living, and value systems, there was little opportunity for mutual contact or exchange across status lines. The increased possibility of inter-status marriage was a natural outcome of increased contact and exchange between Buraku and non-Buraku communities and the attendant homogenization of living space and value systems. Despite these changes in life situation, marriage discrimination, as part of the basis of society, demonstrates the continuation of prejudice after the end of status society. Buraku/non-Buraku marriages, which, pre-war comprised at most 10% of marriages, the majority of which were common law, have recently risen steeply. For example, a 1993 governmental survey of Dowa area inhabitants indicates that, drawn from 59, 646 Dowa households sampled as part of a survey of living conditions nation-wide, in 57.5% of responding households both husband and wife were from a Dowa area, in 36.6% of responding households either the husband or the wife was from a Dowa area, and in 5.9% neither husband nor wife was from a Dowa area. However, if the focus is narrowed to couples where the husband’s age is 35 or less, i.e. relatively younger couples, in more than 60% of couples either the wife or husband was from a Dowa area, the other was not. This indicates that the wall of discrimination surrounding marriage is crumbling, albeit slowly. However, the other side of this is that high rates of one-sided marriage-refusal remain a harsh reality. Additionally, family background checks, through a private detective or similar agency, are still common practice. Marriage might accurately be described as a marker of a new phase in a person’s life, and the blocking of marriage due to a revelation that one’s potential marriage partner is of Buraku background is an inexcusable violation of human rights. The elimination of such bad habits as the exchange of family lineage information, for example, the regulation of background checks, and the elevation of general human rights consciousness have often been pointed out as a means of bringing this type of discrimination to an end. With regard to the regulation of background checks specifically, in March of 1985 Osaka prefecture, in advance of all other administrative units in the country, issued and passed a “regulation for the control of surveys relating to anti-Buraku discriminatory acts in Osaka prefecture” (enacted October 1, 1985). The first article of this regulation makes clear the objective: “This ordinance is passed in order to provide a necessary ordinance regulating any action such as surveys or advertisements conducted in a way that might possibly result in discrimination in, for example, marriage or employment against a person who lives or has lived in a Dowa area, prevent the occurrence of anti-Buraku discriminatory events, and value the protection of the basic human rights of the citizens of our prefecture.” Following Osaka’s lead, Kumamoto (1995.3.16), Fukuoka (1995.10.20), Kagawa (1996.7), and Tokushima (1997.4) all passed ordinances with similar objectives of regulating background checks. However, with regard to the actual enforcement of the ordinances, it is necessary to bring attention to a variety of background checks between ’96 and ’98 that violate the spirit of these ordinances, including a direct challenge coming from the incorporated Osaka Prefectural Association of Surveyors.

(Nakagawa Kiyoko)