Live data from Hacker News

Women are rejecting marriage in Asia. The social implications are serious.

economist.com

211–217 of 217 posts

Re: Women are rejecting marriage in Asia. The social implications are serious.

#211
post #66

It would have been useful if this article had taken into account the fact that the laws of certain SE Asian countries (i.e., the Philippines) do not provide for divorce: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_law_around_the_world#Ph...

However annulments are increasingly easier to get. Cost about $4K USD from what I understand and a lot of paperwork.

Re: Women are rejecting marriage in Asia. The social implications are serious.

#212
post #57

I have a theory that I haven't found expounded before. It came from a combination of travel through 60+ countries, living and working and interacting with local people on a pretty intimate level sometimes, and study of lots of history. It's going to be controversial and maybe even shocking, so brace yourself for a moment before reacting please. I think peaceful societies self-destruct. With a few notable exceptions t…

A great point, but not very controversial. Mainstream historians often propose that the USA's late 20th century economic, technical, and military prowess was a direct result of WWII. As far as Japan goes - IMO their population is too old to solve the problem on their own. No matter how much propaganda you feed them, 50 year old women cannot have 4 kids.

Japan isn't completely devoid of fertile women. If you convinced them all to want six kids the population would rebound pretty impressively. Hell, my great grandmother had twelve children, and it wasn't that uncommon at the time.

Personally I think the Japanese population will rebound without any meddling. Every large population has sub-populations of people who have lots of kids. Think Mormons in the US. Eventually one or more of these sub-populations will have enough critical mass to affect the overall fertility rate.

In terms of militarization, well, the Japanese navy is still the most powerful navy in Asia. It would make pretty short work of the Chinese navy in any conflict out of range of Chinese land-based aircraft. Just calling a navy a "naval self defense force" doesn't mean it can't hold its own in a fight. This will still be true even when the Shi Lang is fully operational, though I agree the trends are in China's favor.

Re: Women are rejecting marriage in Asia. The social implications are serious.

#213
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually the reason why Japan cannot re-militarize is that it already has done so decades ago. Its military may be called "self defence forces" rather than "armed forces", but it really is a well-funded army of moderate size (6th highest military expenditures in the world).

The constitution MacArthur oversaw specifically forbids a military[1] and despite recent attempts to amend the constitution this has not happened. However, the limit on a military force was later interpreted as provisioning a self-defense force, ergo SDF. It was intentionally limited so as to prevent Japan from immediately rising as a military power but to not require longterm occupation of Japan by U.S. forces[2][3]…

In practical terms there are only two restrictions on the Japanese military: No nuclear weapons and no aircraft carriers. Even the prohibition on aircraft carriers is a bit leaky.

Have a look at the Hyuga class "helicopter carrying destroyer": http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideaircraftcarriers/16ddh.htm. On thing you notice is that unlike almost every other amphibious assault ship in the world the Hyuga class has an offset island, meaning you can land fixed-wing aircraft. Officially it carries 18 helicopters, but it has everything you need to carry an air wing (range, fuel, ammo, maintenance, and communications). So all they really need to to is fly off the helicopters and fly on some sort of STOL aircraft (like the F-35C) and presto! An aircraft carrier about on par with the British Invincible class.

Recently the Maritime SDF (you know, Navy) got the go-ahead for a "helicopter carrying cruiser", which would be the same thing only bigger, although still officially not an aircraft carrier.

Re: Women are rejecting marriage in Asia. The social implications are serious.

#214
post #67

I am married to a Japanese and live here right now, so I can only comment on the situation of the country. I will try to give an economical assessment of the situation. As you might be aware Japan had a “lost decade” during the 90s. It experienced almost no growth of the GDP. There are many theories as to why, but the most convincing one is: The Japanese “Baby Boomers” retired during this decade. In fact the percenta…

The Japanese insistence on working 80 hours a week is also doing much to kill marriage, and families for that matter. You can't have a successful marriage when you're at work or at a (mandatory) after-work drinking session with your idiot and over-the-hill boss. I'm not convinced the government can do much about this either, since it certainly isn't a matter of legislation or enforcement and labor protection is (or can be) quite strong in Japan. Rather the Japanese will typically voluntarily submit to these awful practices. When the government fact-finding commission tasked with finding out why Japanese will take on onerous working hours when they are often encouraged not to, itself wound up working people 80+ hours each week, what can you possibly do?

I love it here and I'm not going anywhere, but this is not a problem with any clear solution. And if its impact on marriage is as large as I suspect, marriages aren't going to get any healthier soon, either.

Re: Women are rejecting marriage in Asia. The social implications are serious.

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"there are no marriages, because marriages are nowadays too fast and detrimental for male parties. What we need, is actual equality between the genders." I'm not sure I follow this logic. By all indications in both the East and West, it's women, not men, who are driving the changes in marriage rates, ages, and trends. 1) Women are entering and succeeding in the workforce, and accordingly, they see less reason to give…

> Unfortunately, they can't wait too long, because eventually, they'll lose out to younger women entering the same market Consider this scenario: a man seeking marriage is likely to continue seeking it through his old age (e.g. doesn't become an eternal bachelor or celibate). In this case, a woman of that same old age is likely to marry someone young because they can provide for their young husband materially, and fr…

The factor you're leaving out is fertility.

Re: Women are rejecting marriage in Asia. The social implications are serious.

#216
post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost every case famine during last few decades had to do with some kind of local conflict (e.g. local gangs interfering with delivery of food aid) as opposed to resource shortage. Developed countries produce much more food than they need and then consume it in a very inefficient way. Growing grain and using it to feed livestock as opposed to consuming grain directly is one such example. Earth could comfortably supp…

But what if we actually want to eat meat? What if we want a TV? A refrigerator? A dishwasher? A mobile phone? A car?

Being both a carnivore and a big consumer electronics junkie I can relate to your argument. I was mostly answering to parent poster's comment about people starving. However I'm a big believer in technology being able to overcome that kinds of limits. Here's an excellent essay illustrating how 15 billion people could be supported at the level of American living standards: http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/index.html

(As a nice bonus, this is written by John McCarthy, the inventor of LISP).

Re: Women are rejecting marriage in Asia. The social implications are serious.

#217
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The constitution MacArthur oversaw specifically forbids a military[1] and despite recent attempts to amend the constitution this has not happened. However, the limit on a military force was later interpreted as provisioning a self-defense force, ergo SDF. It was intentionally limited so as to prevent Japan from immediately rising as a military power but to not require longterm occupation of Japan by U.S. forces[2][3]…

In practical terms there are only two restrictions on the Japanese military: No nuclear weapons and no aircraft carriers. Even the prohibition on aircraft carriers is a bit leaky. Have a look at the Hyuga class "helicopter carrying destroyer": http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideaircraftcarriers/16ddh.htm . On thing you notice is that unlike almost every other amphibious assault ship in the world the Hyuga class has an…

The two you've listed and of course limits on national spending that involve the military which as a result significantly limit the growth of the SDF. Japan wants to avoid directly and blatantly invalidating their constitution; after all, it is supposed to be the fundamental set of laws that validate the state. That's why there's been such a push to amend the constitution.
Post reply on HN