01. News: March 2006 Archives

The Centre for Gender Research (CGR), or in Malay, Pusat Penyelidikan Gender (PPG), is a research center under the administration of the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities at the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. CGR was established on July 1, 2003. The mission of CGR is to become a center of excellence that seeks to enhance knowledge and expertise in the field of gender studies so that information gathered and the skills acquired through its activities will contribute to the improvement of the quality of life of the peoples of Malaysia and Southeast Asia.

In spring, the Center of Gender Studies at ICU will commemorate its second year and the first students of the Program in Gender and Sexuality Studies (PGSS) will graduate in March, with many more interested students in line to take their place. All this is due not only to the passion and energy of the many lecturers and professors but also to the high quality and motivation of about thirty dedicated student staff members who have voluntarily organized reading groups and enthusiastically communicated with people from other countries.There cannot be many other university research centers which depends so much on the energy of students.

“Gender free” has become a target term for bashing in political and educational fields in Japanese society. The term is a Japanese coined one for the idea of “setting oneself free of socially imposed gender structure”. The term attracted controversy in sex education discourse. In classroom activities, “gender free” is widely used, but the opposition group has raised the argument that education based on the discourse of “gender free” is too radical and destructive of traditional values. In 2005, senior political figures such as Ms Eriko Yamatani, LDP Upper House Member, and Mr Hosoda, the then chief Cabinet secretary and the Minister for gender equality made comments: Mr Hosoda stated that “the government does not use” nor “term its social significance” of “gender free” in the context of “reforming” the social implementation of gendered views, and the use of “gender free” is “undesirable in this context”. Interestingly, the limited nature of Mr Hosoda’s disapproval is ignored by the opposition group. This is the general context for the present pressure on the use of “gender free” and its retrospective influence on the argument surrounding the Basic Act for Gender Equality.

n recent years there have been many voices raised in opposition to gender-free education. In this paper I discuss some of my own concerns regarding the claims of gender-free education which have been criticized by the backlash groups.

The gender-free argument that certain traditional rites such as Girls Day and Boys Day impose standards of femininity and masculinity have conversely been criticized for introducing a new standard of "correctness." Although I agree with this criticism, I also think that there is a fundamental problem with the actual structure of the argument itself and the idea that arguments must begin with a "reason" or "rationale".

Firstly, if one must always begin with a rationale, does this lower the value of statements without a rationale? Secondly, beginning with a rationale can often shift or narrow the scope of the argument. If the persuasive power of the rationale is suspect, is it not only the rationale which loses effect but also statements which are made without a rationale? If so, will I be unable to speak out? Finally, can one stir people's hearts by simply lining up rationales?

ICU Graduate School : Naomi SUZUKI