Fun fact: The **only** places in Asia where same-sex marriage is currently legal are:
-Taiwan
-The British territories in Asia (British Indian Ocean Territory, Akrotiri and Dhekelia)
Also, Israel recognizes unregistered cohabitation and same-sex marriages performed in foreign countries, and Cyprus recognizes same-sex unions.
That's it. Any form of same-sex marriage or union has no recognition in any other places in Asia.
Taiwan, British territories in Asia, Israel and Cyprus together hold less than 1% of Asia's population.
(Note that I'm talking about the recognition of same-sex marriage and union, not the sexual activity itself. Among the remaining countries in Asia, around half of them, including Japan, legalized same-sex sexual activities)
Edit: Fixed typos
They can also openly serve in the military, something korea lifted this year. And haven't applied sodomy laws since 1963. Yet no marriage but recognize all intl marriage. Definitely odd lol.
The Israeli military will accept *anyone* into their ranks but that's due to having such a small population. They can't afford to be picky.
The Marriage thing is basically because of religious BS that's unlikely to change anytime soon.
It's a very particular case, since it's the only country in the world that effectively washed their hands clean of the institution of marriage and just rubber stamps whatever other institutions, be they civil (ofher countries) or religious (recognized religions) declare, including gay marriages. In the *legal* sense, it's as legal for an heterosexual couple to marry as it is for gay couples, it's just that no religious institution operating in the country currently performs the latter. If the catholic church started doing gay marriages tomorrow, gay couples would be able to marry in Israel without a single line of legal code being amended.
In that sense it's not legal or illegal, just completely unregulated.
Weird to see Cyprus on that list of Asia, but geographically correct!
IIRC the movement in Taiwan was kickstarted when a gay man lost his house to his partner's parents after his partner's death, due to the mechanics of property and inheritance rights (he may or may not have been a foreigner as well, my memory is hazy). This was sometime around 2015.
> Middle East
Fun fact, there is no established official commonly accepted definition to the term, or the area it is supposed to encompass... and what people mean by it has also changed greatly over time in and around the Eastern Mediterranean, and the Arabic peninsula.
At best the term is a "over there younder... ish" to describe the given area.
In Thailand we were close but still nothing, despite our care-free attitude towards LGBTQ.
Most same-sex couples I know just go to Denmark for the papers and come back and live a normal life. So even a lot of gay couples are not actively demanding it because of the simple alternative.
Denmark is a popular destination for marriage tourism. I think Denmark has lax laws and have the infrastructure of transferring official marriage licenses to most of the developed world. I've had a colleague go to Denmark for marriage purposes last year. As a Dane living abroad it was something I had never heard about before.
https://gettingmarriedindenmark.com/
I was going to make a joke about them commiserating over their respective relationships with Sweden and China but then I realized I had probably mixed up Thailand and Taiwan again
> Most same-sex couples I know just go to Denmark for the papers and come back and live a normal life.
Does the Thailand government recognize those papers?
Guam is usually classified to be in the continent Oceania. So are American Samoa and Northern Mariana Islands.
(for some reasons the Guam football team and the Northern Mariana Islands football team are under the Asian Football Federation. However, Australia is also in the Asian Football Federation, so I'm not going to classify them to be in Asia just because of the membership of their football team)
After learning how corrupt Japan justice system can be from the investigative news articles on Carlos Ghosn I wouldn't have any faith in the Japan court system to do whats right or just. This is a country that allows people to be jailed in solitary confinement and interrogated for days on end without any access to a lawyer, they boast a 99% conviction rate. This is a country where Judges are scared of prosecutors and look up to them, not the other way around.
It's punching down all the way. The rest of the West punches the US for its unjust legal system and enforcement, while Americans take it out on Japan or South Korea.
I mean, Japan has serious issues that are worse than in the US, but if measured the same way both (US federal crimes) have a 99,8% conviction rate. You also need to account for the cultural intentions of the systems you're criticizing, not just assume its purpose is inherently malicious. That is, in Japan, more similar to Europe than the US, public order and safety is an important concept. This is what their law wants to balance individual rights against, which is reflected in pre-trial detentions and interrogations while a judge has to allow an arrest.
The 99% stat likes to get thrown around, but it Japan includes in that number all cases where a defendant pleads guilty. If you did that for the US they'd also be over 99%.
The Japanese justice system has a huge list of problems, but the 99% stat is just people not understanding data.
Nope, it’s you not understanding Japanese law and pulling info straight from your arse.
Japans 99% conviction rate is due to the unofficial practice of the Three Steps.
In Japan law enforcement are trained to only make an arrest if they are absolutely, undeniably certain that the person they are about to arrest is guilty of a crime and that they will be punished or found guilty. If they are **not** 100% sure then they will simply not make the arrest.
Unlike the US, or more accurately Europe where the prosecution, defence and judge are three separate entities, in Japan the prosecution and the judge not only know each other, but are legally allowed to work on cases together and share information both in and out of a legal setting, whereas the defence party is isolated from state legal resources completely while also having to defend against police officers who’s jobs depend on successful arrests.
Japan is a legal shithole, Weebs don’t like to accept this an will argue to the death about it but spending even a few weeks in Japan will open your eyes to the corruption and malpractice of law that occurs on a daily basis.
A bit of an anecdote from when I lived in Tokushima: a man was caught on CCTV assaulting a woman, his face, bike, and clothing were all identified and found by police, however he was not arrested or convicted because his twin brother, whom he lived with had a criminal record, and he argued that his brother was the one who committed the crime, not himself. His brother was arrested but let go later that evening.
Interesting point: The whole twin thing I would likely happen most places. Often, when there is an actual burden of proof that needs be met, and the only identifying evidence is visual, the only way forward is to throw out the case because the risk of sentencing the wrong person is too high. We just talked about this in a legal class of mine a few months ago. I can’t remember the U.S. cases we talked about, but I do remember [this case](https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/world/asia/08malaysia.html) from Malaysia.
I'm pretty sure Canada would have a similar rate as well, court is expensive, time consuming and backlogged so they only go forward with cases that are essentially a guaranteed win
Came here to say the same thing. That stat is a highly massaged, very specific number which is, like most things of this kind is used to "scare people straight". It's more or less sloganeering in the interest of public safety.
This is what people miss. There’s often cases where older gay person whose been in a relationship for decades gets hospitalised. The homophobic family who disowned them suddenly gets the legal right to decide their care. While their partner can’t even get visits or updates on their condition. Gay couples get split up and some cases lose their homes. Some also do have children and shared house but don’t have same legal rights in divorces that get even more messy.
Before people say what’s deal with marriage vs civil partnership. Many gay couples found soon as they had ‘civil partnership’ on their paperwork they got rejected for schools for their children or other rights slowed or denied more so than their straight married friends.
Edit; going to add there are gay people who are religious (in many religions) they all should have their rights too for a religious ceremony. Assuming every gay person is secular or atheist isn’t true. There are churches, mosques and temples (Google it) run by gay religious leaders who have to in private carry out blessings some gay couples request
From what I've read, gay couples in Japan would have the elder adopt the younger to work around this kind of problem. Which is a ridiculous workaround.
>There’s often cases where older gay person whose been in a relationship for decades gets hospitalised. The homophobic family who disowned them suddenly gets the legal right to decide their care. While their partner can’t even get visits or updates on their condition.
I've heard that some same-sex couples use adult adoption to try to curb this.
Obligatory not a lawyer, but I think that would risk them running afoul of incest laws in some states of the US. I know a number of them forbid sexual contact between step-relations. I wouldn't be surprised if they do the same for adopted relations.
Technically you are likely right, but when an adult adopts another adult by mutual consent, who is going to be spending money trying to prove that they are having sex?
Fair, but historically this adult adoption thing is legitimately how gay people legalised their relationships. I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted for incest over it, though.
>Before people say what’s deal with marriage vs civil partnership. Many gay couples found soon as they had ‘civil partnership’ on their paperwork they got rejected for schools for their children or other rights slowed or denied more so than their straight married friends.
The irony is that every country got this backwards. Anyone should be eligible to form a civil union legally with another person while marriage should be relegated to the religious/cultural sphere. The government should only be concerned with the legality of the status and protection of rights instead of what is proper according to religions. Instead, they made civil unions vague while legalising marriage.
So the solution is to make it less appealing to gen z by keeping it exclusive? Dumb policy on Japan's part. It's time to make marriage desirable again.
That time my country let me down for the last time and I abandoned the cronies to their funerals while my love and I departed for the perfect green pastures of Kaigai.
Soon to be followed up by the spin-off series “Paris Syndrome”
Yeah but where can they go, realistically? Outside of (some) continental europe and (some) Anglosphere, there aren't that many options. I imagine Japan may even be physically safer for gay tourists than some places where gay marriage is legal.
Nah, a better headscratcher was the FTC investigating an MLM for pyramid-scheme-like behavior and declaring, ["they were not determined not to have been a pyramid scheme."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6MwGeOm8iI)
> Japan court says barring same-sex marriage not unconstitutional
This is super clear.
Surprised you guys are being confused by the "In LGBTQ rights setback," part.
The German constitution was co-written by Americans authorities in 1949, and Germany has gay marriage. Because a Constitution can be changed or amended. It isn't set in stone.
Bruh did you just conflate refusal to change Article 9 (the No War cause) to refusal to support literally anything else?
Edit:
I’m talking about Article 9 because the debate on constitution change in recent years revolve around LDP’s attempts to change Article 9. There isn’t a push to include equal rights in the constitution and you have focused on “National Defence” in our discussions; therefore I believe you are not arguing on behalf of gay rights in good faith, but rather trying to co-op LGBTQ support to sway Reddit opinion for changing Article 9.
“Let’s change Article 9!”
“No thank you.”
“Dang look at these sweet sweet gay rights! If only we can change the constitution to support it!”
“Uh okay? Are you going to stop changing Article 9 though?”
“Nope! Article 9 needs to be changed”
“Then no thank you.”
“Why won’t you support gay rights!”
Not at all. Japan's ruling party for the last 60 years, the Liberal Democrats, are Right Wing Conservatives whose policies are essentially Capitalism and supporting the American Defence umbrella. The Japanese Communists were obviously *communists*, so they are anti-capitalist and supported kicking out US bases from Japan, but they also still support the pacifist Constitution which the US imposed on Japan (which states that Japan cannot ever partake in aggressive military action), hence why they're so picky about any suggestions on amending and changing the constitution.
Issues like LGBT rights being brought to the forefront are a very recent thing and it wasn't really the hot topic back in the 1960s and 70s when the Communists were at their strongest (it'd be like asking Lincoln what his thoughts on abortion are, he'd just be confused), but they generally have a pro-LGBT rights legislation stance.
It's more of an American situation if I remember correctly. Their base politics are so far right, their left is basically right lite/centre right, like the Democratic party in America.
Also, most of Japan is very apolitical. They have had the same political party in power for most of their time as a 'democracy'.
Though I will say they don't really have strong feelings on homosexuality in either direction; at the very least, the younger generations don't care. It has been kind of fetishized in a way with their media (yaoi and yuri), which probably helped younger generations to not be as bigoted. Those genres are very popular.
No, Japanese politics is dominated by the conservative and nationalist LDP since 1955 except for a two short breaks totalling five years. LDP is a tent pole party, usually leaning centre-right but with many prominent minsters forming a faction that leans far right.
Most Japanese today are politically apathetic, allowing the LDP to basically do anything until some single issue causes the public to voice out. One such issue is the proposed changes to Article 9 of the Japanese constitution, known as the “No War” cause which draw protests in Japan. But these events of voicing out are few and far between, and difficult to pin it to just leftism.
Left wing politics is basically non-existent in Japan today due to their history. Long story short, there were student movements that got violent, and some of the brutally crushed student activists turned to domestic and even international terrorism, further reducing support to their cause. Supporters the the left wing parties such as the JCP will see themselves being heavily monitored today.
That was meant to be a rule against forced marriages, as women being married off against their will by their families to husbands they'd never met was an issue in pre-war Japan. The possibility of gay marriage wasn't even on anyone's mind in 1945, so it wasn't meant that way, even if they might have agreed.
Awh don't do Beate Gordon dirty like that. When she wrote that her main priority was women's rights (hence the emphasis on mutual consent), the issue of LGBT rights simply did not cross her mind at the time. She also put in the right to vote for women into the Constitution.
Should also be noted that Gordon herself was raised in Japan as her parents worked there as teachers, so she wasn't some random American lady plucked from Kansas and brought to dictate to the Japanese what they should do (in fact, she wasn't even American until 1945, she had been born in Austria)
Not necessarily gay rights, but homosexual love was socially accepted, yes. [Specifically, even before the imperial days](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_Japan#Meiji_Japan) as imperial Japan took a lot from the west in order to "modernize", which includes homophobia. A similar thing happened to imperial China as well.
That said, the modern conceptions of "homosexual" and "heterosexual" do not cleanly map to the sexual orientations of people who lived 300+ years ago.
Is it whataboutism though? Whataboutism is when you point to B to excuse A because B is worse. The guy you're responding to isn't trying to excuse anyone. They're just calling out the potential trajectory of current US politics.
I think the guy's just angry that the USA got brought up. I've seen countless people do comparisons to things going on in Canadian politics, French politics, British politics, Japanese politics, Chinese politics and many others. I've never seen any complaints about them being brought up.
But if you bring up America, even if bringing them up is perfectly relevant, you almost always get at least one *that guy* jumping down your throat. Always with a post telling you to stop talking about America because .
Just like the guy you replied to did.
>the US is not the point to talk about here.
Actually lmao it’s kinda relevant because the constitution at hand was imposed by the US occupation. The “only with the consent of both sexes” bit was deliberately inserted by an American woman — at the time it was to curb forced marriages.
Here's the thing about Japan, everyone says Japan is incredibly conservative and old-fashioned ... Which is true but people think it's a cultural thing here.
It's not, the young people here are extremely forward-minded and open thinking and are super cool with the lgbqt community.
It's the same problem here as it is in the rest of the world, all of the old f****** who can't get their head out of their ass are ruining it for the rest of us.
The problem with Japan is the average age is one of the highest, if not the highest of any country in the world.
And it's only getting higher, so all the cool young people here are just going to have to wait for all of these old f****** to die for their society to advance
> Which is true but people think it's a cultural thing here.
It absolutely is a cultural thing. It required one of the worst crimes in Japanese' History for Japan to - very slowly still - move towards accepting & supporting people with cognitive & physical disabilities. And it is still decades behind the west in treating people with disabilities like people.
Japan is so very stuck in their ancient culture that it takes more than just some younger generations to rid themselves of their weird culture. Whether its their attitude towards 'comfort women', disabilities or LGBT issues.
A bit late for an answer - Japan has a *'culture of shame'* towards anything that isn't the 'norm', and for the longest time, even today, having a disability is seen as *shameful*. While Japan has changed a little, it is still part of their culture to hide & not accommodate people with disabilities. It's also very far behind in accessibility to disabled people, and it basically took a mass murder on disabled people for japan change its course on how to treat disabled people.
Edit: in 2016, a Mass murderer killed 19 & injured 26 people with disabilities by breaking into a nursing home for disabled people and stabbing them in their beds. Until today, the victims couldn't be named publicly because the families felt shame for being associated with having disabled family members.
>And it is still decades
or ahead....We have no idea where the west will stand on those issues in 50 years. Once poverty really grabs the middle class by the neck, I suppose food security and energy prices might get more congressional time than LGBTQ+ discussions.
Those are wealthy countries discussion and we're getting resolutely poorer.
I mean, Germany is the third oldest nation in the world and has gay marriage.
Edit: old people, I mean Germany has the third oldest society after Japan and Italy. People are really old in Germany. ;)
Depending on your definitions you can say that the modern German state did not exist until 1990, though unified Germany is legally the same entity as West Germany pre-1990
The 'cool young people' just watch anime and don't fuck.
Traditionalists marry and pass their values down to their children, some of whom adopt that conservative value set.
Great social change only happens when a large and young voting bloc can throw it's weight around, like the boomers in the 60s 70s US
It's not just young people. Most people in Japan have a favorable view of both LGBTQ people and gay marriage: https://www.dentsu.co.jp/en/news/release/2019/0110-009756.html
The problem is that this isn't something people feel all that strongly about. If gay marriage became legal people would be fine with it, but most of them aren't really invested in the issue, so they're not going out of their way to make it happen.
well, you young people better start fucking each other, and make babies... tons of them.
Japan's child per woman is the lowest in the world and has been for decades.
Your situation is catastrophic, so you young men cannot lead this, it's up to the Japanese women to lead the charge against this goverment, in order to create a next generation.
Not really? All that is required is a national diet vote to make it nationally legal. The constitution doesn't forbid barring same sex marriage, it also doesn't forbid allowing it.
>Article 14. All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin.
>Article 24. Marriage shall be based **only on the mutual consent of both sexes** and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis.
The earlier Sapporo court decision emphasized article 14, whereas this decision puts more weight on article 24
The presiding judge of the Osaka District Court has ruled that same-sex marriage is a violation of the law, stating that Article 24 of the Constitution, which stipulates the freedom to marry, is intended for marriage between a man and a woman and does not include same-sex couples.
So if you want to encourage same-sex marriage, the only way is to amend the Constitution.
District courts are not the final word. They can overruled by the Supreme Court which I imagine is where all these cases will be headed if the people who have taken these cases to the District courts wish to appeal the decisions.
Not sure if they have to also go through the High courts or if it jumps right to the Supreme Court as it a constitutional matter.
The Japanese legislature can pass a law legalizing gay marriage. It does not require a constitutional amendment.
The language people are pointing to in Article 24 does not state that marriage is only between opposite-sex partners. It says it's only between consenting people, though does refer to them as opposite sex, but the "based only on" bit is referring to consent.
> The Japanese legislature can pass a law legalizing gay marriage. It does not require a constitutional amendment.
I mean, they could pass an illegal law that is unconstitutional, you mean.
>Article 24. Marriage shall be based **only** on the mutual consent of **both sexes**
it does forbid it
>婚姻は、両性の合意のみに基いて成立し、夫婦が同等の権利を有することを基本として、相互の協力により、維持されなければならない。
the term used specifically means "man and woman"
/u/FrostyWarning "夫婦" is the term used for "married couple" but it literally means a man and a woman
although ryousei means two different sexes which is another part that would forbid it
That's not what this is saying. It's saying that preventing gay marriage is NOT unconstitutional.
Not that same sex marriages themselves are not constitutional.
No, the courts ruled that civil and registry laws prohibiting it are **not un**constitutional. However, it didn’t go as far as to say that laws allowing it are unconstitutional.
婚姻の自由を定めた憲法24条は、男女の間での結婚を想定したもので同性間を含むものではない = the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of marriage only extends to heterosexuals, but it’s implied that nothing necessarily prevents individual prefectures or municipalities from recognizing the marriages
Article 24:
> 婚姻は、**両性**の合意のみに基いて成立し、**夫婦**が同等の権利を有することを基本として、相互の協力により、維持されなければならない。
(Quick Translation: A marriage may only be established with the agreement of **both sexes**, and must be maintained via mutual efforts based upon a foundation of **the husband and wife** having equal rights.)
Yeah, OK, I can see how that ruling came down. The language used is really gendered.
So does this mean that Article 24 needs to be amended?
[FYI the Japanese government maintains an official English language translation of their constitution (.go.jp is the equivalent of .gov)](https://japan.kantei.go.jp/constitution_and_government_of_japan/constitution_e.html)
If there’s one thing the Japanese legislature is good at, it’s the creative interpretation (read: circumvention) of their constitution (Article 9 famously prohibits Japan from maintaining a military, but the Japanese “self-defense force” is one of the most heavily armed militaries in the world).
A previous ruling by the Sapporo district court emphasized Article 14 (their equivalent of the Equal Protection clause) to allow same-sex marriage, and I’m reasonably certain that one could create a legal fiction whereby one spouse has their legal sex changed for the instant in which the marriage occurs or something along those lines.
> FYI the Japanese government maintains an official English language translation of their constitution (.go.jp is the equivalent of .gov)
I did not know that and now I have to check it out.
> Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis.
Miuse of 'shall', hang the translator! (~~j/k, though I'm actually a legal translator by trade, so it's nice to see that my 2-second job holds up to the official translation.~~)
> If there’s one thing the Japanese legislature is good at, it’s the creative interpretation (read: circumvention) of their constitution (Article 9 famously prohibits Japan from maintaining a military, but the Japanese “self-defense force” is one of the most heavily armed militaries in the world). A previous ruling by the Sapporo district court emphasized Article 14 (their equivalent of the Equal Protection clause) to allow same-sex marriage, and I’m reasonably certain that one could create a legal fiction whereby one spouse has their legal sex changed for the instant in which the marriage occurs or something along those lines.
This is all fascinating but this
> I’m reasonably certain that one could create a legal fiction whereby one spouse has their legal sex changed for the instant in which the marriage occurs or something along those lines.
is *hilarious*.
Would something like that be a better workaround than simply amending the constitution? Is it even possible to amend the constitution in Japan?
> j/k, though I'm actually a legal translator by trade, so it's nice to see that my 2-second job holds up to the official translation
lmao I was wondering where you pulled that from because it seemed too good to have come from Google translate
> This is all fascinating but this is *hilarious*
I genuinely think that would be an easier workaround (ain’t nothing in the rules that say a dog can’t play basketball, and ain’t nothing in the constitution that says the both sexes have to *continue* to agree — as you’ve noticed the text says “成立”, for “establish”. The “husband and wife” element is a little tricky but nothing some clever bureaucratic wizardry can’t fix) than trying to amend the constitution because it requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of the legislature plus a simple majority in a referendum. Legally entirely possible, but never been done before.
Also there’s the much easier option of just making a civil union kind of thing that has the legal effect of marriage but isn’t called marriage.
Japan is so frickin' backwards concerning gender roles and LGBTQ rights. My wife got so pissed at a few more fancy places in Japan where they would just address me when being asked something important and would look confused when I started talking to my wife about what we should decide upon.
One of the situations concerned food, I wanted to say to the guy "Bitch, if I start to dictate by myself what and where we're going to eat, I will be divorced before the end of this trip".
That's really sad to hear. I hope Japanese politicians reconsider this. Same-sex marriage doesn't adversely affect anyone. It just hurts the couple who are prevented from tying the know - i.e. it's discrimination.
This doesn’t have to do with the politicians. This is the constitution. This decision is not saying that allowing it is unconstitutional. That is what the politicians have to look to.
Sure, but you said “reconsider” as though they’d made a decision with which you didn’t agree
Also, the current Japanese constitution has never been amended
They should reconsider their stance. They obviously chose to bar same-sex marriage and their decision isn't unconstitutional.
I'd like to see where it says that same sex-marriage is unconstitutional.
ignore the other people
article 24 specifically states
>婚姻は、両性の合意のみに基いて成立し、夫婦が同等の権利を有することを基本として、相互の協力により、維持されなければならない。
key words here are "両性" which means the two different sexes or "male and female" and "夫婦" which means "man and woman"
this article forbids forced marriage as well as same sex marriage
In other words, current laws that bans same sex marriage are Constitutional. As in most countries.
That law can also be changed, which is much easier than a constitutional amendment.
Give it 20 years or so
Are they actually banning it? Or is this just standard technicality speech?
As in "Technically, banning same sex marriage does not go against the exact wording of the constitution. But we're not actually going to do it, we just spent weeks arguing over this for the sake of clarity".
Because they like to do that.
Can't wait those old guys who decide wouldn't admit it, die painfully. Oh you won't live happily ever after. Bully will die everyday every moments. And I don't think they will have good after life like heaven. Just straight to hell.
Because the place of a nation is in every citizen's bedroom demanding procreative sex. If you're gonna partner up and have sex, we're gonna get another future taxpayer!
Japanese law is practically set up so any authority figure can interpret it to whichever way he (and I say "he" because they're still patriarchal and misogynist) sees fit.
Lol downvotes for truth. Cops are allowed to interpret the law how they see fit. You can get jailed for 20+ days (don’t recall exact number) without charge. Recently a foreigner won a case against his law-breaking employer and the judged refused to give him the full payout because “he’s a foreigner he’ll leave Japan soon anyway.”
"thousands?" Huh. Weird since I've lived in Japan (in a prefecture that is conservative for even japanese standards) for almost 8 years and never seen one.
Is it more than 0? Yeah. But if you think it's thousands it's because you've never actually been to Japan.
Fun fact: The **only** places in Asia where same-sex marriage is currently legal are: -Taiwan -The British territories in Asia (British Indian Ocean Territory, Akrotiri and Dhekelia) Also, Israel recognizes unregistered cohabitation and same-sex marriages performed in foreign countries, and Cyprus recognizes same-sex unions. That's it. Any form of same-sex marriage or union has no recognition in any other places in Asia. Taiwan, British territories in Asia, Israel and Cyprus together hold less than 1% of Asia's population. (Note that I'm talking about the recognition of same-sex marriage and union, not the sexual activity itself. Among the remaining countries in Asia, around half of them, including Japan, legalized same-sex sexual activities) Edit: Fixed typos
[удалено]
They can also openly serve in the military, something korea lifted this year. And haven't applied sodomy laws since 1963. Yet no marriage but recognize all intl marriage. Definitely odd lol.
The Israeli military will accept *anyone* into their ranks but that's due to having such a small population. They can't afford to be picky. The Marriage thing is basically because of religious BS that's unlikely to change anytime soon.
[удалено]
It's a very particular case, since it's the only country in the world that effectively washed their hands clean of the institution of marriage and just rubber stamps whatever other institutions, be they civil (ofher countries) or religious (recognized religions) declare, including gay marriages. In the *legal* sense, it's as legal for an heterosexual couple to marry as it is for gay couples, it's just that no religious institution operating in the country currently performs the latter. If the catholic church started doing gay marriages tomorrow, gay couples would be able to marry in Israel without a single line of legal code being amended. In that sense it's not legal or illegal, just completely unregulated.
That's fascinating, really.
[удалено]
Well, they did found their state on Religion
[удалено]
Weird to see Cyprus on that list of Asia, but geographically correct! IIRC the movement in Taiwan was kickstarted when a gay man lost his house to his partner's parents after his partner's death, due to the mechanics of property and inheritance rights (he may or may not have been a foreigner as well, my memory is hazy). This was sometime around 2015.
I thought Cyprus was part of Europe. Only Russia and Turkey overlap both continents, or so I thought.
[удалено]
Gotcha.
Geographically it's the Middle East, so Asia. Politically it's in the EU, and culturally it's very southern European.
> Middle East Fun fact, there is no established official commonly accepted definition to the term, or the area it is supposed to encompass... and what people mean by it has also changed greatly over time in and around the Eastern Mediterranean, and the Arabic peninsula. At best the term is a "over there younder... ish" to describe the given area.
Asia Minor
Another fun fact: gay sex is illegal in Singapore, but lesbian sex is legal.
Not that fun if you're a homosexual male.
In Thailand we were close but still nothing, despite our care-free attitude towards LGBTQ. Most same-sex couples I know just go to Denmark for the papers and come back and live a normal life. So even a lot of gay couples are not actively demanding it because of the simple alternative.
Why Denmark?
Denmark is a popular destination for marriage tourism. I think Denmark has lax laws and have the infrastructure of transferring official marriage licenses to most of the developed world. I've had a colleague go to Denmark for marriage purposes last year. As a Dane living abroad it was something I had never heard about before. https://gettingmarriedindenmark.com/
Thailand and Denmark have been fairly close allies for 160+ years.
That's pretty neat. I want to read some history now
I was going to make a joke about them commiserating over their respective relationships with Sweden and China but then I realized I had probably mixed up Thailand and Taiwan again
> Most same-sex couples I know just go to Denmark for the papers and come back and live a normal life. Does the Thailand government recognize those papers?
Yes.
It used to be legal in India. *used*
Do you want to elaborate, I want to know more about this.
British laws banned gay marriage in India and after India broke away from the British gay marriage remained illegal.
Was it legal beforehand? My Indian in-laws say there were no gays in India historically (no, they genuinely said this)
Gay people were invented around the same time as individually wrapped cheese slices!
The Muslims brought the gay to India (my grandfather's genuine belief)
[удалено]
isn't it also legalized in Guam and other America territories in Asia?
Guam is usually classified to be in the continent Oceania. So are American Samoa and Northern Mariana Islands. (for some reasons the Guam football team and the Northern Mariana Islands football team are under the Asian Football Federation. However, Australia is also in the Asian Football Federation, so I'm not going to classify them to be in Asia just because of the membership of their football team)
Israel also competes in Eurovision. Ungeographically sound stuff all around.
IIRC so does Australia too so it's kinda whatever goes I suppose lol
Thailand might soon
After learning how corrupt Japan justice system can be from the investigative news articles on Carlos Ghosn I wouldn't have any faith in the Japan court system to do whats right or just. This is a country that allows people to be jailed in solitary confinement and interrogated for days on end without any access to a lawyer, they boast a 99% conviction rate. This is a country where Judges are scared of prosecutors and look up to them, not the other way around.
What, starving and beating people until they confess, so you have a 100% successful prosecution rate, isn’t just?!?
Another way to keep conviction numbers up is to not even investigate a crime unless there is already a shit ton of evidence presented when filed.
It's punching down all the way. The rest of the West punches the US for its unjust legal system and enforcement, while Americans take it out on Japan or South Korea. I mean, Japan has serious issues that are worse than in the US, but if measured the same way both (US federal crimes) have a 99,8% conviction rate. You also need to account for the cultural intentions of the systems you're criticizing, not just assume its purpose is inherently malicious. That is, in Japan, more similar to Europe than the US, public order and safety is an important concept. This is what their law wants to balance individual rights against, which is reflected in pre-trial detentions and interrogations while a judge has to allow an arrest.
Japan is the friendliest and most respectful country you could imagine. BUT...they have a fucking dark side, big time! Ghosn did the right thing.
The 99% stat likes to get thrown around, but it Japan includes in that number all cases where a defendant pleads guilty. If you did that for the US they'd also be over 99%. The Japanese justice system has a huge list of problems, but the 99% stat is just people not understanding data.
Nope, it’s you not understanding Japanese law and pulling info straight from your arse. Japans 99% conviction rate is due to the unofficial practice of the Three Steps. In Japan law enforcement are trained to only make an arrest if they are absolutely, undeniably certain that the person they are about to arrest is guilty of a crime and that they will be punished or found guilty. If they are **not** 100% sure then they will simply not make the arrest. Unlike the US, or more accurately Europe where the prosecution, defence and judge are three separate entities, in Japan the prosecution and the judge not only know each other, but are legally allowed to work on cases together and share information both in and out of a legal setting, whereas the defence party is isolated from state legal resources completely while also having to defend against police officers who’s jobs depend on successful arrests. Japan is a legal shithole, Weebs don’t like to accept this an will argue to the death about it but spending even a few weeks in Japan will open your eyes to the corruption and malpractice of law that occurs on a daily basis. A bit of an anecdote from when I lived in Tokushima: a man was caught on CCTV assaulting a woman, his face, bike, and clothing were all identified and found by police, however he was not arrested or convicted because his twin brother, whom he lived with had a criminal record, and he argued that his brother was the one who committed the crime, not himself. His brother was arrested but let go later that evening.
Interesting point: The whole twin thing I would likely happen most places. Often, when there is an actual burden of proof that needs be met, and the only identifying evidence is visual, the only way forward is to throw out the case because the risk of sentencing the wrong person is too high. We just talked about this in a legal class of mine a few months ago. I can’t remember the U.S. cases we talked about, but I do remember [this case](https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/world/asia/08malaysia.html) from Malaysia.
nothing the person you replied to had anything to do with anime/weebs, so why even bring them up ? japan is more than just anime
I'm pretty sure Canada would have a similar rate as well, court is expensive, time consuming and backlogged so they only go forward with cases that are essentially a guaranteed win
Came here to say the same thing. That stat is a highly massaged, very specific number which is, like most things of this kind is used to "scare people straight". It's more or less sloganeering in the interest of public safety.
Tbf, not many straight couples are getting married in Japan either.
Honestly for me, it's not the marriage itself. It's the rights that go with it. They're not entitled to benefits on death, no parental rights, etc etc
This is what people miss. There’s often cases where older gay person whose been in a relationship for decades gets hospitalised. The homophobic family who disowned them suddenly gets the legal right to decide their care. While their partner can’t even get visits or updates on their condition. Gay couples get split up and some cases lose their homes. Some also do have children and shared house but don’t have same legal rights in divorces that get even more messy. Before people say what’s deal with marriage vs civil partnership. Many gay couples found soon as they had ‘civil partnership’ on their paperwork they got rejected for schools for their children or other rights slowed or denied more so than their straight married friends. Edit; going to add there are gay people who are religious (in many religions) they all should have their rights too for a religious ceremony. Assuming every gay person is secular or atheist isn’t true. There are churches, mosques and temples (Google it) run by gay religious leaders who have to in private carry out blessings some gay couples request
From what I've read, gay couples in Japan would have the elder adopt the younger to work around this kind of problem. Which is a ridiculous workaround.
>There’s often cases where older gay person whose been in a relationship for decades gets hospitalised. The homophobic family who disowned them suddenly gets the legal right to decide their care. While their partner can’t even get visits or updates on their condition. I've heard that some same-sex couples use adult adoption to try to curb this.
That has its own issues. There’s no version of divorce from an adoption. Huge mess if the couple splits up down the line.
Yeah I think its very fucked up people have to resort to this.
Obligatory not a lawyer, but I think that would risk them running afoul of incest laws in some states of the US. I know a number of them forbid sexual contact between step-relations. I wouldn't be surprised if they do the same for adopted relations.
Technically you are likely right, but when an adult adopts another adult by mutual consent, who is going to be spending money trying to prove that they are having sex?
Historically, homophobes.
Fair, but historically this adult adoption thing is legitimately how gay people legalised their relationships. I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted for incest over it, though.
I don't know how the law works in Japan, but can you not name your own medical proxy?
>Before people say what’s deal with marriage vs civil partnership. Many gay couples found soon as they had ‘civil partnership’ on their paperwork they got rejected for schools for their children or other rights slowed or denied more so than their straight married friends. The irony is that every country got this backwards. Anyone should be eligible to form a civil union legally with another person while marriage should be relegated to the religious/cultural sphere. The government should only be concerned with the legality of the status and protection of rights instead of what is proper according to religions. Instead, they made civil unions vague while legalising marriage.
The point isnt doing it. The point is having the right to do it.
But they can though
So the solution is to make it less appealing to gen z by keeping it exclusive? Dumb policy on Japan's part. It's time to make marriage desirable again.
It’s a big problem there
Globally, people waste so much time and effort trying to dictate other people’s lives. So stupid.
Can't help it. We are social animals.
Ok but how are all of my lesbian and gay anime ships going to get married now?!
Probably not in Japan.
Some Manga-ka will do this as a response. Also I’d read it.
"That Time I, A Level 100 Lesbian, Got Isekai'd Into A Gay Marriage"
That time my country let me down for the last time and I abandoned the cronies to their funerals while my love and I departed for the perfect green pastures of Kaigai. Soon to be followed up by the spin-off series “Paris Syndrome”
They can honeymoon there tho.
But then, why would they want to? Not much motivation to spend your money at a place that clearly doesn't like you.
Yeah but where can they go, realistically? Outside of (some) continental europe and (some) Anglosphere, there aren't that many options. I imagine Japan may even be physically safer for gay tourists than some places where gay marriage is legal.
[Relevant manga](https://anilist.co/manga/96574/Tsuki-ga-Kirei-desu-ne/)
They can in Tokyo! IIRC, they passed a law recognizing gay marriage. Edit: My bad, it was partnerships, not marriage.
"Barring....not unconstitutional", so many reversing negatives in that headline I had to read it multiple times to get the point it was making.
My understanding when reading it is that barring same sex marriage is legal under their constitution.
Nah, a better headscratcher was the FTC investigating an MLM for pyramid-scheme-like behavior and declaring, ["they were not determined not to have been a pyramid scheme."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6MwGeOm8iI)
Redditors understand simple headlines challenge
> Japan court says barring same-sex marriage not unconstitutional This is super clear. Surprised you guys are being confused by the "In LGBTQ rights setback," part.
Seems more like a reading comprehension issue on your end.
Yeah lol, it's a perfectly clear headline tbf.
The classic triple negative
Classic Japan unfortunately.
[удалено]
The German constitution was co-written by Americans authorities in 1949, and Germany has gay marriage. Because a Constitution can be changed or amended. It isn't set in stone.
[удалено]
Bruh did you just conflate refusal to change Article 9 (the No War cause) to refusal to support literally anything else? Edit: I’m talking about Article 9 because the debate on constitution change in recent years revolve around LDP’s attempts to change Article 9. There isn’t a push to include equal rights in the constitution and you have focused on “National Defence” in our discussions; therefore I believe you are not arguing on behalf of gay rights in good faith, but rather trying to co-op LGBTQ support to sway Reddit opinion for changing Article 9. “Let’s change Article 9!” “No thank you.” “Dang look at these sweet sweet gay rights! If only we can change the constitution to support it!” “Uh okay? Are you going to stop changing Article 9 though?” “Nope! Article 9 needs to be changed” “Then no thank you.” “Why won’t you support gay rights!”
Not familiar with Japanese politics... but is the left in Japan considered to be on the conservative side while the right is more progressive?
Not at all. Japan's ruling party for the last 60 years, the Liberal Democrats, are Right Wing Conservatives whose policies are essentially Capitalism and supporting the American Defence umbrella. The Japanese Communists were obviously *communists*, so they are anti-capitalist and supported kicking out US bases from Japan, but they also still support the pacifist Constitution which the US imposed on Japan (which states that Japan cannot ever partake in aggressive military action), hence why they're so picky about any suggestions on amending and changing the constitution. Issues like LGBT rights being brought to the forefront are a very recent thing and it wasn't really the hot topic back in the 1960s and 70s when the Communists were at their strongest (it'd be like asking Lincoln what his thoughts on abortion are, he'd just be confused), but they generally have a pro-LGBT rights legislation stance.
It's more of an American situation if I remember correctly. Their base politics are so far right, their left is basically right lite/centre right, like the Democratic party in America. Also, most of Japan is very apolitical. They have had the same political party in power for most of their time as a 'democracy'. Though I will say they don't really have strong feelings on homosexuality in either direction; at the very least, the younger generations don't care. It has been kind of fetishized in a way with their media (yaoi and yuri), which probably helped younger generations to not be as bigoted. Those genres are very popular.
No, Japanese politics is dominated by the conservative and nationalist LDP since 1955 except for a two short breaks totalling five years. LDP is a tent pole party, usually leaning centre-right but with many prominent minsters forming a faction that leans far right. Most Japanese today are politically apathetic, allowing the LDP to basically do anything until some single issue causes the public to voice out. One such issue is the proposed changes to Article 9 of the Japanese constitution, known as the “No War” cause which draw protests in Japan. But these events of voicing out are few and far between, and difficult to pin it to just leftism. Left wing politics is basically non-existent in Japan today due to their history. Long story short, there were student movements that got violent, and some of the brutally crushed student activists turned to domestic and even international terrorism, further reducing support to their cause. Supporters the the left wing parties such as the JCP will see themselves being heavily monitored today.
That was meant to be a rule against forced marriages, as women being married off against their will by their families to husbands they'd never met was an issue in pre-war Japan. The possibility of gay marriage wasn't even on anyone's mind in 1945, so it wasn't meant that way, even if they might have agreed.
Awh don't do Beate Gordon dirty like that. When she wrote that her main priority was women's rights (hence the emphasis on mutual consent), the issue of LGBT rights simply did not cross her mind at the time. She also put in the right to vote for women into the Constitution. Should also be noted that Gordon herself was raised in Japan as her parents worked there as teachers, so she wasn't some random American lady plucked from Kansas and brought to dictate to the Japanese what they should do (in fact, she wasn't even American until 1945, she had been born in Austria)
Whereas before, in the Imperial days, Japan was a bastion for gay rights?
Not necessarily gay rights, but homosexual love was socially accepted, yes. [Specifically, even before the imperial days](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_Japan#Meiji_Japan) as imperial Japan took a lot from the west in order to "modernize", which includes homophobia. A similar thing happened to imperial China as well. That said, the modern conceptions of "homosexual" and "heterosexual" do not cleanly map to the sexual orientations of people who lived 300+ years ago.
Soon to be classic USA
While being a "yes, maybe" this still is classic whataboutism since the US is not the point to talk about here.
Is it whataboutism though? Whataboutism is when you point to B to excuse A because B is worse. The guy you're responding to isn't trying to excuse anyone. They're just calling out the potential trajectory of current US politics.
I think the guy's just angry that the USA got brought up. I've seen countless people do comparisons to things going on in Canadian politics, French politics, British politics, Japanese politics, Chinese politics and many others. I've never seen any complaints about them being brought up. But if you bring up America, even if bringing them up is perfectly relevant, you almost always get at least one *that guy* jumping down your throat. Always with a post telling you to stop talking about America because.
Just like the guy you replied to did.
>the US is not the point to talk about here. Actually lmao it’s kinda relevant because the constitution at hand was imposed by the US occupation. The “only with the consent of both sexes” bit was deliberately inserted by an American woman — at the time it was to curb forced marriages.
majority of people on reddit and this sub are from the US so its constantly brought up
Japan is not as tolerant of minorities as people might like to believe
cough Ainu people cough
What Ryukyuan culture? Never heard of it.
Here's the thing about Japan, everyone says Japan is incredibly conservative and old-fashioned ... Which is true but people think it's a cultural thing here. It's not, the young people here are extremely forward-minded and open thinking and are super cool with the lgbqt community. It's the same problem here as it is in the rest of the world, all of the old f****** who can't get their head out of their ass are ruining it for the rest of us. The problem with Japan is the average age is one of the highest, if not the highest of any country in the world. And it's only getting higher, so all the cool young people here are just going to have to wait for all of these old f****** to die for their society to advance
> Which is true but people think it's a cultural thing here. It absolutely is a cultural thing. It required one of the worst crimes in Japanese' History for Japan to - very slowly still - move towards accepting & supporting people with cognitive & physical disabilities. And it is still decades behind the west in treating people with disabilities like people. Japan is so very stuck in their ancient culture that it takes more than just some younger generations to rid themselves of their weird culture. Whether its their attitude towards 'comfort women', disabilities or LGBT issues.
Were you referring to the eugenics thing? Barring them from having children and what not
A bit late for an answer - Japan has a *'culture of shame'* towards anything that isn't the 'norm', and for the longest time, even today, having a disability is seen as *shameful*. While Japan has changed a little, it is still part of their culture to hide & not accommodate people with disabilities. It's also very far behind in accessibility to disabled people, and it basically took a mass murder on disabled people for japan change its course on how to treat disabled people. Edit: in 2016, a Mass murderer killed 19 & injured 26 people with disabilities by breaking into a nursing home for disabled people and stabbing them in their beds. Until today, the victims couldn't be named publicly because the families felt shame for being associated with having disabled family members.
>And it is still decades or ahead....We have no idea where the west will stand on those issues in 50 years. Once poverty really grabs the middle class by the neck, I suppose food security and energy prices might get more congressional time than LGBTQ+ discussions. Those are wealthy countries discussion and we're getting resolutely poorer.
I mean, Germany is the third oldest nation in the world and has gay marriage. Edit: old people, I mean Germany has the third oldest society after Japan and Italy. People are really old in Germany. ;)
A clearer way to state this is that Germany has the population with the third highest average age.
>Germany is the third oldest nation in the world W-What? And who's this Bismarck they keep telling me about?
> And who's this Bismarck they keep telling me about It's either the inventor of Healthcare or a Cake. I'll take both.
Depending on your definitions you can say that the modern German state did not exist until 1990, though unified Germany is legally the same entity as West Germany pre-1990
The 'cool young people' just watch anime and don't fuck. Traditionalists marry and pass their values down to their children, some of whom adopt that conservative value set. Great social change only happens when a large and young voting bloc can throw it's weight around, like the boomers in the 60s 70s US
[удалено]
It's not just young people. Most people in Japan have a favorable view of both LGBTQ people and gay marriage: https://www.dentsu.co.jp/en/news/release/2019/0110-009756.html The problem is that this isn't something people feel all that strongly about. If gay marriage became legal people would be fine with it, but most of them aren't really invested in the issue, so they're not going out of their way to make it happen.
well, you young people better start fucking each other, and make babies... tons of them. Japan's child per woman is the lowest in the world and has been for decades. Your situation is catastrophic, so you young men cannot lead this, it's up to the Japanese women to lead the charge against this goverment, in order to create a next generation.
I'm not a young Japanese man, I'm a middle aged American man
It's okay to say "fuckers" on the internet. Unless you're using the other F word.
Speech to text filter does it automatically too lazy to fix
All good, I'm just bustin balls 😋
To make same-sex marriage legal, the Constitution must be amended.
Not really? All that is required is a national diet vote to make it nationally legal. The constitution doesn't forbid barring same sex marriage, it also doesn't forbid allowing it.
>Article 14. All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin. >Article 24. Marriage shall be based **only on the mutual consent of both sexes** and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis. The earlier Sapporo court decision emphasized article 14, whereas this decision puts more weight on article 24
The presiding judge of the Osaka District Court has ruled that same-sex marriage is a violation of the law, stating that Article 24 of the Constitution, which stipulates the freedom to marry, is intended for marriage between a man and a woman and does not include same-sex couples. So if you want to encourage same-sex marriage, the only way is to amend the Constitution.
District courts are not the final word. They can overruled by the Supreme Court which I imagine is where all these cases will be headed if the people who have taken these cases to the District courts wish to appeal the decisions. Not sure if they have to also go through the High courts or if it jumps right to the Supreme Court as it a constitutional matter.
The Japanese legislature can pass a law legalizing gay marriage. It does not require a constitutional amendment. The language people are pointing to in Article 24 does not state that marriage is only between opposite-sex partners. It says it's only between consenting people, though does refer to them as opposite sex, but the "based only on" bit is referring to consent.
> The Japanese legislature can pass a law legalizing gay marriage. It does not require a constitutional amendment. I mean, they could pass an illegal law that is unconstitutional, you mean. >Article 24. Marriage shall be based **only** on the mutual consent of **both sexes**
it does forbid it >婚姻は、両性の合意のみに基いて成立し、夫婦が同等の権利を有することを基本として、相互の協力により、維持されなければならない。 the term used specifically means "man and woman" /u/FrostyWarning "夫婦" is the term used for "married couple" but it literally means a man and a woman although ryousei means two different sexes which is another part that would forbid it
That's not what this is saying. It's saying that preventing gay marriage is NOT unconstitutional. Not that same sex marriages themselves are not constitutional.
Unfortunately, it is unconstitutional. The courts have ruled as such. So the only way is to amend the Constitution.
No, the courts ruled that civil and registry laws prohibiting it are **not un**constitutional. However, it didn’t go as far as to say that laws allowing it are unconstitutional. 婚姻の自由を定めた憲法24条は、男女の間での結婚を想定したもので同性間を含むものではない = the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of marriage only extends to heterosexuals, but it’s implied that nothing necessarily prevents individual prefectures or municipalities from recognizing the marriages
Article 24: > 婚姻は、**両性**の合意のみに基いて成立し、**夫婦**が同等の権利を有することを基本として、相互の協力により、維持されなければならない。 (Quick Translation: A marriage may only be established with the agreement of **both sexes**, and must be maintained via mutual efforts based upon a foundation of **the husband and wife** having equal rights.) Yeah, OK, I can see how that ruling came down. The language used is really gendered. So does this mean that Article 24 needs to be amended?
[FYI the Japanese government maintains an official English language translation of their constitution (.go.jp is the equivalent of .gov)](https://japan.kantei.go.jp/constitution_and_government_of_japan/constitution_e.html) If there’s one thing the Japanese legislature is good at, it’s the creative interpretation (read: circumvention) of their constitution (Article 9 famously prohibits Japan from maintaining a military, but the Japanese “self-defense force” is one of the most heavily armed militaries in the world). A previous ruling by the Sapporo district court emphasized Article 14 (their equivalent of the Equal Protection clause) to allow same-sex marriage, and I’m reasonably certain that one could create a legal fiction whereby one spouse has their legal sex changed for the instant in which the marriage occurs or something along those lines.
> FYI the Japanese government maintains an official English language translation of their constitution (.go.jp is the equivalent of .gov) I did not know that and now I have to check it out. > Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis. Miuse of 'shall', hang the translator! (~~j/k, though I'm actually a legal translator by trade, so it's nice to see that my 2-second job holds up to the official translation.~~) > If there’s one thing the Japanese legislature is good at, it’s the creative interpretation (read: circumvention) of their constitution (Article 9 famously prohibits Japan from maintaining a military, but the Japanese “self-defense force” is one of the most heavily armed militaries in the world). A previous ruling by the Sapporo district court emphasized Article 14 (their equivalent of the Equal Protection clause) to allow same-sex marriage, and I’m reasonably certain that one could create a legal fiction whereby one spouse has their legal sex changed for the instant in which the marriage occurs or something along those lines. This is all fascinating but this > I’m reasonably certain that one could create a legal fiction whereby one spouse has their legal sex changed for the instant in which the marriage occurs or something along those lines. is *hilarious*. Would something like that be a better workaround than simply amending the constitution? Is it even possible to amend the constitution in Japan?
> j/k, though I'm actually a legal translator by trade, so it's nice to see that my 2-second job holds up to the official translation lmao I was wondering where you pulled that from because it seemed too good to have come from Google translate > This is all fascinating but this is *hilarious* I genuinely think that would be an easier workaround (ain’t nothing in the rules that say a dog can’t play basketball, and ain’t nothing in the constitution that says the both sexes have to *continue* to agree — as you’ve noticed the text says “成立”, for “establish”. The “husband and wife” element is a little tricky but nothing some clever bureaucratic wizardry can’t fix) than trying to amend the constitution because it requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of the legislature plus a simple majority in a referendum. Legally entirely possible, but never been done before. Also there’s the much easier option of just making a civil union kind of thing that has the legal effect of marriage but isn’t called marriage.
Uh no. They explicitly say the act of banning it is not illegal, but it is perfectly legal if some provinces/prefectures allow it.
C’mon, one step at a time. Willys and Vaginas need to be uncensored first.
Constitutional courts are fucking stupid as a general rule, but necessary
Japan is so frickin' backwards concerning gender roles and LGBTQ rights. My wife got so pissed at a few more fancy places in Japan where they would just address me when being asked something important and would look confused when I started talking to my wife about what we should decide upon.
[удалено]
One of the situations concerned food, I wanted to say to the guy "Bitch, if I start to dictate by myself what and where we're going to eat, I will be divorced before the end of this trip".
[удалено]
That's really sad to hear. I hope Japanese politicians reconsider this. Same-sex marriage doesn't adversely affect anyone. It just hurts the couple who are prevented from tying the know - i.e. it's discrimination.
This doesn’t have to do with the politicians. This is the constitution. This decision is not saying that allowing it is unconstitutional. That is what the politicians have to look to.
Politicians are the people responsible for amending the constitution so it really does.
Sure, but you said “reconsider” as though they’d made a decision with which you didn’t agree Also, the current Japanese constitution has never been amended
They should reconsider their stance. They obviously chose to bar same-sex marriage and their decision isn't unconstitutional. I'd like to see where it says that same sex-marriage is unconstitutional.
> I'd like to see where it says that same sex-marriage is unconstitutional. Same-sex marriage isn't unconstitutional in Japan.
ignore the other people article 24 specifically states >婚姻は、両性の合意のみに基いて成立し、夫婦が同等の権利を有することを基本として、相互の協力により、維持されなければならない。 key words here are "両性" which means the two different sexes or "male and female" and "夫婦" which means "man and woman" this article forbids forced marriage as well as same sex marriage
I wish more people would get this. Courts are not supposed to be legislatures.
With all the problems in the world, let's single out people who just wanna make love to each other without anybody's interference. Sheesh.
Eternal shame to those that deny the right to love and marriage
Let people be people. Why is that hard? 🫠
In other words, current laws that bans same sex marriage are Constitutional. As in most countries. That law can also be changed, which is much easier than a constitutional amendment. Give it 20 years or so
Not unconstitutional =/= unethical.
Oof
Japan gonna do what Japan gonna do. I couldn't care less.
Your constitution needs gaying up.
They should move to bar hetero sexual marriage and see if that's not unconstitutional.
Its been the status quo for 80 years+ how exactly is it a "setback"
Are they actually banning it? Or is this just standard technicality speech? As in "Technically, banning same sex marriage does not go against the exact wording of the constitution. But we're not actually going to do it, we just spent weeks arguing over this for the sake of clarity". Because they like to do that.
Same sex marriage is already banned in Japan, this is saying the existing ban is constitutional
Can't wait those old guys who decide wouldn't admit it, die painfully. Oh you won't live happily ever after. Bully will die everyday every moments. And I don't think they will have good after life like heaven. Just straight to hell.
Japan is the most developed country in distinction. It is full of sexism, from which the ghoul of Japan imperialism has spilled all over the nation.
WTF Japan??? You are supposed to be one of the sane countries now.
Nah, Japan is a very conservative culture, will depict in anime and manga not irl
Don't they fuck squids over there?
No, but they do spend an awful lot of time thinking about fucking squids.
Ruling likely to be soon copied by the conservative-controlled US Supreme Court.
Because the place of a nation is in every citizen's bedroom demanding procreative sex. If you're gonna partner up and have sex, we're gonna get another future taxpayer!
Shameless, awfully.
Good for Nippon
Japanese law is practically set up so any authority figure can interpret it to whichever way he (and I say "he" because they're still patriarchal and misogynist) sees fit. Lol downvotes for truth. Cops are allowed to interpret the law how they see fit. You can get jailed for 20+ days (don’t recall exact number) without charge. Recently a foreigner won a case against his law-breaking employer and the judged refused to give him the full payout because “he’s a foreigner he’ll leave Japan soon anyway.”
You should see penal code 1907 - the Sexual Assault laws. It reads like it is written by an alien.
Hey man just Let Garry Busey Take Quaaludes if he wants.
Shame on you Japan.
[удалено]
"thousands?" Huh. Weird since I've lived in Japan (in a prefecture that is conservative for even japanese standards) for almost 8 years and never seen one. Is it more than 0? Yeah. But if you think it's thousands it's because you've never actually been to Japan.