男女格差 Global Gender Gap Report

Japan ProbeでGlobal Gender
Gap Reportを紹介しているが、これについては去年も当ブログの男女格差で投稿した。
日本は惨憺たるもので、今年は９８位である。

　これについて、日本のフェミニストはどうみているのか、あるいは、日本の女性はどう見ているのか、知りたいところである。

　最低限注目すべきは、この集計の特徴は、

Rich countries have more education
and health opportunities for all members of society
and measures of levels thus mainly reflect this well-known
fact, although it is quite independent of the gender-related
issues faced by each country at its own level of income.

要するに、極端な話、あくせく働き日々の生活に大変でも、みんな初等教育しか受けていなくても、社長という地位、政治家という地位についているような女性が男性の割合と近づき、また、所得格差も少なくすれば、のんべんだらりんとした主婦が多い国家よりも総合順位は高い、ということである。

　で、この集計は、男女格差の結果を示しているものの、何らかの意図的な差別政策が行われていることは意味しないが、男女の役割分担に関するある種の固定的実践が作用していることは示している。もっとも、固定的役割分担があるからといって、それが、即座に一方が他方を抑圧している、ということも意味しない。男性が女性を主婦の地位に閉じこめているのか、それとも女性が男性を外で働かせて責任を負わせて、こき使っているのか、そう単純な話ではなかろう。


で、こうした、固定的役割分担があると、

The　most important determinant of a country’s competitiveness
is its human talent―the skills, education and productivity
of its workforce―and women account for one-half of the
potential talent base throughout the world. Over time,
therefore, a nation’s competitiveness depends significantly
on whether and how it educates and utilizes its female talent.
To maximize its competitiveness and development
potential, each country should strive for gender equality―
i.e., to give women the same rights, responsibilities and
opportunities as men.

女性の貴重な能力が政治や職場で、無駄にされ、国家として競争力が弱体化すること、

Reducing gender　inequality in these countries could play a key role in　addressing the future problems posed by ageing populations
and mounting pension burdens. Moreover, these　results confirm that in countries in which it is relatively　easy for women to work and to have children, female　employment and female fertility both tend to be higher.

男女格差を縮小し、女性が労働市場の快適な地位を確保することによって、年金の負担の担い手になり、また、出生率の増加にもつながり老齢化社会対策にもなること、などがあげられている。

　これらの視点は重要であろう。

　もっとも、日本の財界人が（意外にも？）男女共同参画に積極的である理由もしっかり把握しておくべきではある。男女共同参画を推進する本当の狙いは何か（永井哲哉ドットコム）

　日本では政治的・法的な権利は平等に与えられているが、どうも文化的な役割分担の固定観念が強いのか、あるいはかかあ天下の地位・役割がわりに快適なせいか、おれの若かったころに比べても多少の違いはあるが、あまり意識変革がないようにも思う。

　いや、別に、この集計でトップになるように結果の平等を実現すべく、クォータ制度を取り入れるべきだ、などというつもりはない。また、家庭の主婦も、あるいは、パートをしている女性もそれはそれでいいのであるが、有能な女性の資質が無駄にされている場合があり、それについては多いに改善されるべきであり、また、有能な女性が相応の地位につけるような環境・雰囲気を醸成すること、また、こうした経済状況のなかで、夫婦にとって子育てをしつつ、快適に共稼ぎができるような社会体制の実現が必須であろう、と思う。

　個人的にいえば、男が家庭の主夫として世間から白い眼でみらることのない社会だったらなああ、という思いはある。

更新
　Japan Probeでは、予想通り、西洋の騎士たちが日本を嘆いておられる。
そんななか、ステレオ氏が客観的なデータ分析をしておられる。

Comment by stereo
2008-11-13 13:33:47

When you look deeper into the research, you will find it a joke.

For example, according to the report, Japan ranks 88th in the field of the Educational Attainment. The score for Educational Attainment is made up of four components, which are Literacy Rate, Enrolment in Primary Education, Enrolment in Secondary Education, Enrolment in Tertiary Education. Japan ranks #1 in the first 3 components, but ranks 90th in Enrolment in Tertiary Education, because the rates are 54% for females and 61% for males.

Japan
Enrolment in Tertiary Education
Female: 54%, Male: 61%, Female to Male Ratio 88%, Rank 90.

Now, look at Jamaica that ranked #1 in overall Educational Attainment as well as Enrolment in Tertiary Education.

Jamaica
Enrolment in Tertiary Education
Female: 26%, Male: 12%, Female to Male Ratio 229%, Rank 1.

So, the report says Jamaican women are better off because more females go to tertiary education than males, ignoring only 26% of them can afford to it compared to 54% for Japanese women.

The same goes with Health and Survival. Both Japan and Hungary ranked #1 in Healthy Life Expectancy.

Healthy Life Expectancy
Japan
Female: 78, Male: 72, F to M Ratio 1.08, Score 1.06, Rank 1.
Hungary
Female: 68, Male: 62, F to M Ratio 1.10, Score 1.06, Rank 1.

Who would think Hungarian women are as good as Japanese women when it comes to Life expectancy. Japanese women have 10 years more healthy life expectancy than hungarian women.

The other component of Health and Survival is Sex Ratio at Birth.
Sex Ratio at Birth (female/male)
Japan: 0.94 Rank 88.
Iran: 0.95 Rank 1.
Italy: 0.93 Rank 112.
So, Iran is the best place for baby girls, followed by Japan, and Italy is the worst place. Who would believe that?

I think they should find better ways to spend their money.

更新２
韓国系英語ブログの
Marmot's holeでも同じ題目を取り扱っている。

#
Above Criticism your flag
Posted November 13, 2008 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

Does anyone know why the Philippines ranks so high? (Yes, it has a female premier, but so did Pakistan and Bangladesh.) And why IS Canada ranked so low?
#
Wedge your flag
Posted November 13, 2008 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

#5: In the PI, the women do all the work while the guys play cards.

フィリピンはなぜ、ランクが高いのか、という問いに、あそこじゃ、おんなが働いて、男はトランプしているからさ、と言っている。趣味の悪い冗談であろうが、理屈としてはそういうこともあり得る。

更新３
他のもこういう意見がある。

Having lived in both Japan and the US recently, I can say that it all depends on what you define as equality. On the one hand, women can have successful careers more in the US, on the other hand, (at least in major cities), it seems to me that the viability of stay at home moms is increasingly rare. I make a pretty good salary but with today's living expenses, there is no way I could support a family by myself. In fact, virtually every married person in my workplace has a spouse that is also working which means their kids have to go to daycare. There also seems to be a negative view of women who are not "independent" and stay home to support the husband and kids.

I think the social and economic value Japan places in the 専業主婦 has many positive aspects. In the end, it's a difference of culture and not something you can rank.

Posted by Blogger Tae Kim | 11/13/2008 10:59:00 AM

http://j78.blogspot.com/2008/11/blog-post_13.html?showComment=1226595540000#c5119995750872641735

更新４

omment by MikeGuest
2008-11-14 11:14:39

This research seems to be flawed in several ways. First, it claims to be measuring “opportunities” and allotment of resources. So, does Jamaica really allow for the greatest “opportunities” for women in tertiary education when only 26% of the women are taking tertiary education (vs. 54% for Japan)? Surely, this is measuring attainment, not opportunity, or allotment of resources. If a study does not measure what it claims to be measuring it is effectively invalid.

Not only that but this study is self-admittedly measuring attainment vis-a-vis gender within each individual country (but then ranks these countries against each other). This means that local factors should be essential variables but this study admittedly fails to consider them. For example, a poor country with large extended families might send a woman out to work as a domestic helper to earn money while the male stays at home and hangs out. It seems unfair, exploitative and sexist, but this study would regard such women as being more “empowered” than the males.

In Japan, men who work hand their paypackets over to the wife, who then dole out an allowance to the man. The wife then makes virtually all economic decisions within the home (education too), but according to this study such women are not economically, or otherwised, empowered. One can also see large numbers of young (and not so young) Japanese women with visibly large disposable incomes, often living with the parents but enjoying gourmet food trips, shopping in Omotesando, traveling to Bali and the like but this Life of Riley would be considered disadvatanged by this study who would see salarymen who log 16 hours a day stuck on trains or in a dank office as having more “opportunities”. Hmmm.

Ponta has already pointed out that opportunity should include the concept of choice and I agree. That many women in Japan choose to reduce working hours or quit work after having children (my wife is fully-accredited J professional who is happy to make such a choice) while the men have to continue with salaryman drudgery to provide is not reflected in this study or is seen as disadvantageous for women.

Women can and do meet unfair and delibitating practices in Japan (and elsewhere) but this study doesn’t reflect that in any meaningful way. Also, the idea that gender implies a clear role division in many, many societies should not automaically be tagged as disadvantaged or unempowering- that would be a cultural bias. The notion of “power” should not be limited to corporate boardrooms and parliaments.

この調査結果に対するもっとも優れた分析だろう。