Yamakawa Kikue

From 1915 through 1916, Kikue made a debut as Aoyama Kikue in the world of criticism within the larger debate on the abolition of prostitution with a Japanese feminist Itō Noe on Seito, the first female literary magazine in Japan.[20] Itō Noe criticized the Christian female organization's movement to abolish the prostitution licensed by the government because the organization's movement was "hypocritical" in that the organization tried to abolish the public prostitution form the viewpoints of valuing "virginity" and "chastity".[21] She blamed the way of the Christian movement which looked down the sex industry and tried to solve the issue just by taking the jobs away from sex workers. Itō also said, ″the sex industry is acknowledged by the public because, as everyone says, the industry has been strengthened by men's natural demands and a long history of the industry.[22]″ Unlike Itō who totally disagreed to the movements, Kikue, to some extent, agreed to the Christian movement aiming at abolishing the public prostitution.[23] However, on the one hand, Kikue agreed to Itō's argument about the movement of Christian women's organizations in that the movement divided women into two categories: "clean" and "unclean" women.[24] On the other hand, Kikue argued that against Itō that the long history of prostitution could not justify the existence of the industry, and that the licensed prostitution was not the system created by men's natural demands but created according to the social system that internalized unnatural power balance between men and women.[25] Moreover, Kikue said that she would disagree to the system from which women suffer even if the system was needed by the men's "instinctive" desire.[26] Kikue also mentioned the private prostitution and contended that the system of the prostitution was based on the disparity between the rich and poor produced by the establishment of the private ownership system and the domination of women by men.[27] Furthermore, she pointed out that the double standards of female sexuality in a male-dominant and patriarchal society.[28] In sum, Kikue did not think the Christian movement, that encouraged women to follow the sexual norm mainly created by men's selfish desire, would lead to the abolishment of the licensed prostitution.[29] Rather, she thought it would be realized by the abolishment of capitalism and the dominance of women by men.[30]

From 1918 to 1919, two magazines Fujin Koron (Women's forum) and Taiyou (The Sun) hosted a controversial debate over maternity protection. In addition to Kikue, who changed her family name to Yamakawa after her marriage, famous Japanese feminists, such as Yosano Akiko, Hiratsuka Raicho, and Yamada Waka, took part in the debate.[31] The debates had broadly two standpoints. On the one hand, Yosano argued that the liberation of women required the economic independence of women.[32] On the other hand, Hiratsuka argued that it was impossible or difficult to do both work and parenting. Hiratsuka also viewed women's childbirth and parenting as a national and social project, and thus argued that women deserved the protection of motherhood by the government.[33] They had different opinions in terms of whether women can do both work and family-life, and their arguments did not overlap at all. In order to organize these argument Yamakawa Kikue named Yosano "Japanese Mary Wollstonecraft" and Hiratsuka "Japanese Ellen Key."[34] As with the argument of Yosano, Yamakawa said, "Yosano emphasizes women's individualism. She started by demanding freedom of education, an expansion of the selection of work, and financial independence and eventually demanded suffrage.″ Yamakawa partly agreed with Yosano but criticized her opinion for thinking only about the female bourgeois.[35] Moreover, Yamakawa disagreed with Yosano that the protection of motherhood by the nation was a shame because it was the same as the government's care of the elderly and the disabled. In this respect, Yamakawa said that Yosano's view was biased on a class society because Yosano only criticized old and disabled people depending on the public assistance while she did not mention soldiers and public servants who also depended on the assistance in the same way.[36] For Hiratsuka's opinion, Yamakawa argued that it was more advanced than that of Yosano in that it took a more critical attitude towards capitalism. However, Yamakawa criticized Hiratsuka for too much emphasis on motherhood. Yamakawa said that Hiratsuka viewed women's ultimate goal as childbirth and parenting, and that it led women to obey male-centered society's idea that women should sacrifice their work in compensation for completing the ultimate goal.[37] Yamakawa summarized these arguments and argued that financial independence and protection of motherhood were compatible and natural demands of women. As a social feminist, Yamakawa argued that female workers should play an active role in winning both economic equality and the protection of motherhood, and that the liberation of women required the reform of capitalist society which exploited workers.[38] Moreover, Yamakawa Kikue made an objection to present society which left household labor unpaid work. Furthermore, Yamakawa was distinct from Yosano and Hiratsuka in that she mentioned welfare for the elderly as rights.[39]

Yamakawa Kikue, as a social feminist, had multiple viewpoints against discrimination (sexism, racism, and classism) and took position against colonialism and imperialism.[40] In 1925, the legislation of the Universal Manhood Suffrage Act abolished the restriction of voting rights based on tax payment and granted the right to all men over age 25. However, women were not allowed to participate in politics. Later, the movement headed by Shin Fujin Kyokai (The New Women's Association) led the government to change the law, which banned women from joining political assemblies.[41] As a result, women were given only the right to participate in political assemblies.

Accompanied by the legislation of the Universal Manhood Suffrage Act (1925), a political study group was organized for re-establishing the Japanese Communist Party. A few women, including Yamakawa Kikue, participated in the study group.[42] However, the policy directions the men-dominant study group made were not sufficient about women's issues. Therefore, Yamakawa submitted the following eight -point demand for equal gender rights:[43]

1. Abolish the patriarchal household system.
2. Abolish all laws that view a woman as an incompetent person, regardless of marital status. Give equal rights between men and women regarding marriage and divorce.
3. Equal rights of educational institutions and work for women and the residents in colonies to Japanese men.
4. Guarantee an equal minimum wage, regardless of sex or ethnicity.
5. Equal pay for equal work among men, women, and the residents in colonies.
6. Provide female working mothers with a room and one thirty minute-recess every three hours for feeding.
7. Ban the firing of women on account of marriage, pregnancy, or childbirth status.
8. Abolish licensed prostitution.

In the first and two points, Yamakawa had much common with her women's suffrage colleagues.[44] Yamakawa shared much with the leadership of the Women's Suffrage League in that both ″argued throughout the prewar period that Japan's legally codified family system, which designated a usually male head-of-household and excluded other family members (including wives) from owning property, denied women legal decision-making capacity.[45]″ In points three, four, and five, Yamakawa was substantially different from her Suffrage League colleagues who did not take issues of equality and inclusion for Japan's colonized peoples into consideration of suffrage or other rights for Japanese women.[46] her final three demands came from the core of her concern for women's rights as workers' rights.[47] Here, Yamakawa represented working-class women by pointing to the most basic issues for them.

Communist male leaders disagreed to the first and second proposals for the reason that they have already acknowledged that women were equal to men.[48] On the other hand, Yamakawa argued that it was not a problem of their perception but a social problem, that in, whether the society accepted the law which approved of gender inequality.[49] Communist male boards also disagreed the third proposal Yamakawa questioned why they approved of educational restriction for residents in colonies which was obviously the part of imperialistic policies whereas they, as Communist, disagreed to imperialistic policies.[50] The Communist leaders disagreed to the equal right of work for women and residents in colonies to Japanese men, arguing that their cheap labor had already taken jobs away from Japanese men. On the other hand, Yamakawa said that capitalist's hiring of women, Chinese, and Koreans because of their cheap labor had already taken jobs away from Japanese men, and that equal pay for equal work in addition to the equal rights in education and work would solve the problems that concerned the leaders. Moreover, Yamakawa argued that women and residents in colonies demanded equal pay and open occupational opportunities as equals to Japanese men, and that they demanded not Japanese male workers but the bourgeoisie to approve the proposal.[51] By emphasizing women's issues within male-dominant socialist organizations, Yamakawa ″shifted socialist discourse in significant ways that forced a consideration of women and their relation to class[52]″ while her proposals were not always adopted.

• Yamakawa, Kikue, 1956. (2014). Onnna Nidai no Ki (A Record of Two Generations of Women). Tokyo, Iwanami Shoten publishers.
• Yamakawa, Kikue, 1890–1980. (2011). Yamakawa kikue shu hyouronhen. Tokyo; Iwanami Shoten Publishers.
• Suzuki, Yuko. (2012). The Significance of Yamakawa Kikue (1890-1980) for Today. Tokyo, Waseda University Gender Studies Institute.
• Yamakawa Kikue, 1890–1980. (1990). Collection of Commentaries by Yamakawa Kikue. Tokyo, Iwanami Shoten, Publishers.
• Faison, E. (2018). "Women's Rights as Proletarian Rights: Yamakawa Kikue, Suffrage, and the "Dawn of Liberation"." In Bullock J., Kano A., & Welker J. (Eds.), Rethinking Japanese Feminisms (pp. 15–33). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv3zp07j.6. (12/3/2018).