News No dual surnames for married couples in Japan

[mdchachi]

(It's a shame they don't offer dual-citizenship, don't you think)

Yes this the first thing you've said in a long time that I agree with. My wife can't become an American because of this. I mean of course she can but she doesn't want to give up her Japanese citizenship and why should she?

 

[thomas]

Rather than adopting a law allowing married couples to keep their surnames, the Takaichi administration aims to legalise the use of maiden names after marriage.

Takaichi opposes separate surnames from the position of placing importance on "traditional family values" and has advocated addressing the issue through the legalization of the use of maiden names as "common names" instead. During a lower house Budget Committee meeting in December 2025, she expressed the government's intention to advance legalization, stating that it could "reduce the number of people who experience social inconveniences or disadvantages caused by changing surnames through marriage." A related bill was planned for submission to the ordinary Diet session in 2026. Legislation of the use of maiden names is also included in the coalition agreement with Nippon Ishin (the Japan Innovation Party, or JIP), with a commitment to "submit and aim for the passage of a bill in the ordinary Diet session."

The newly formed opposition Centrist Reform Alliance, the Democratic Party for the People, the Japanese Communist Party, Reiwa Shinsengumi , the Social Democratic Party and Team Mirai all support the introduction of separate surnames for married couples.

Japan PM's strong opposition to separate surname system reflected in election pledge - The Mainichi

TOKYO -- The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has stated in its campaign pledge for the Feb. 8 House of Representatives election that it aims to

mainichi.jp

 

[Achilles 1-1]

Rather than adopting a law allowing married couples to keep their surnames, the Takaichi administration aims to legalise the use of maiden names after marriage.




The newly formed opposition Centrist Reform Alliance, the Democratic Party for the People, the Japanese Communist Party, Reiwa Shinsengumi, the Social Democratic Party and Team Mirai all support the introduction of separate surnames for married couples.

Japan PM's strong opposition to separate surname system reflected in election pledge - The Mainichi

TOKYO -- The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has stated in its campaign pledge for the Feb. 8 House of Representatives election that it aims to

mainichi.jp

The Ad for Robux under this post gets me, since im an avid Roblox player myself. I've never quite understood why couples would want dual surnames or even want to use their maiden name, seems to me if you're married you should have the same last name. (I know if I get married I will be taking my wife's last name.) Is there really any actual benefit to having dual surnames, or is it just the common case that people use as an excuse, you know, the whole "I'm expressing myself" bullcrap. Could someone clear up peoples seemingly obsessive need to have a different last name than their spouse?

Edit: Yeah I looked it up and its the "I'm expressing myself bullcrap".

 

[mdchachi]

The Ad for Robux under this post gets me, since im an avid Roblox player myself. I've never quite understood why couples would want dual surnames or even want to use their maiden name, seems to me if you're married you should have the same last name. (I know if I get married I will be taking my wife's last name.) Is there really any actual benefit to having dual surnames, or is it just the common case that people use as an excuse, you know, the whole "I'm expressing myself" bullcrap. Could someone clear up peoples seemingly obsessive need to have a different last name than their spouse?

Edit: Yeah I looked it up and its the "I'm expressing myself bullcrap".

I don't get Roblox ads.
You didn't look deeply enough. There are many reasons why one would want to keep their surname.

 

[Achilles 1-1]

I don't get Roblox ads.
You didn't look deeply enough. There are many reasons why one would want to keep their surname.

Other reasons included but aren't limited too reputation (why the hell would marriage ruin a reputation-_-), nd how annoying it is to change your documents, and (my least favorite "Why-the-hell-is-this-even-a-reason") "Individuality" and "Gender Equality" I really don't see how dual surnames promotes individuality. Just seems to me that you're giving your husband the finger. And Gender Equality is fine but like bruh there is a point where you're just asking for stupid stuff that really doesn't matter in the scope of eternity.

 

[Lothor]

Other reasons included but aren't limited too reputation (why the hell would marriage ruin a reputation-_-), nd how annoying it is to change your documents, and (my least favorite "Why-the-hell-is-this-even-a-reason") "Individuality" and "Gender Equality" I really don't see how dual surnames promotes individuality. Just seems to me that you're giving your husband the finger. And Gender Equality is fine but like bruh there is a point where you're just asking for stupid stuff that really doesn't matter in the scope of eternity.

A large number of people want to retain their pre-marriage name, and it doesn't inconvenience the government for them to do so. Neither you nor the state should require a justification of this perfectly reasonable wish.
Conservatives bleat on about small government, so they should not interfere with people's preferred surname - provided a consistent name is registered for taxation and administration purposes, it's none of the government's business.

 

[Achilles 1-1]

A large number of people want to retain their pre-marriage name, and it doesn't inconvenience the government for them to do so. Neither you nor the state should require a justification of this perfectly reasonable wish.
Conservatives bleat on about small government, so they should not interfere with people's preferred surname - provided a consistent name is registered for taxation and administration purposes, it's none of the government's business.

It doesn't really matter if people have a preferred surname. The law says people must share one common surname as a married couple, and thats that. Taking everything in the world into account, is it really so bad to share one surname, no matter the tedious paperwork involved? I plan on getting a bachelors in Poli-sci then moving onto a Law degree, and when I have to change my last name (presumably to my wife's last name if I'm married) yeah the paperwork will suck but I know its not that bad compared to other stuff around the globe (such as the Russian-Ukraine war. I'm not trying to be political, just highlighting that there are other things to be spending time one, Administrative Priority should put this far above dual-surnames.) If all men (meaning male and female) truly are created equal, then this whole individuality and gender identity argument seems, in my opinion, to just be an excuse because some people just want to feel special. While yes, I understand the reasoning behind it, if I were in the position of Takaichi (or whoever is passing the law, I'm still on chapter one of the Japanese constitution), I would opt for something similar to America, where its normal to share one surname, but not required by law to do so, simply for the fact that I guarantee there are topics that are of more importance than what seems to me to be a small administrative hurdle, that could potentially require a redesign of the Koseki to account for the possibility of two surnames in one house, turning it into a large scale fundamental change on how Japan keeps track of families, turning this into a far more complex issue than it needs to be. Here in America, when someone doesn't like a law, we tell them to grow the heck up and quit whining, and get back to work. (its just a joke guys)

 

[Lothor]

It doesn't really matter if people have a preferred surname. The law says people must share one common surname as a married couple, and thats that. Taking everything in the world into account, is it really so bad to share one surname, no matter the tedious paperwork involved? I plan on getting a bachelors in Poli-sci then moving onto a Law degree, and when I have to change my last name (presumably to my wife's last name if I'm married) yeah the paperwork will suck but I know its not that bad compared to other stuff around the globe (such as the Russian-Ukraine war. I'm not trying to be political, just highlighting that there are other things to be spending time one, Administrative Priority should put this far above dual-surnames.) If all men (meaning male and female) truly are created equal, then this whole individuality and gender identity argument seems, in my opinion, to just be an excuse because some people just want to feel special. While yes, I understand the reasoning behind it, if I were in the position of Takaichi (or whoever is passing the law, I'm still on chapter one of the Japanese constitution), I would opt for something similar to America, where its normal to share one surname, but not required by law to do so, simply for the fact that I guarantee there are topics that are of more importance than what seems to me to be a small administrative hurdle, that could potentially require a redesign of the Koseki to account for the possibility of two surnames in one house, turning it into a large scale fundamental change on how Japan keeps track of families, turning this into a far more complex issue than it needs to be. Here in America, when someone doesn't like a law, we tell them to grow the heck up and quit whining, and get back to work. (its just a joke guys)

Laws are made by people, are sometimes incorrect or unjust, and need changing to reflect developments in society. And why the sudden reverence for the law? You seem to be perfectly happy to support a felon leader. It sounds like you're content to live in a society where the lives of the little people are micromanaged by church and state while those in charge do exactly as they please.

It's also not a case of it not being 'really so bad' to share a surname. Some people simply want to retain theirs, and there is no moral reason why they shouldn't. And yes, you are being political. You are slavishly following a conservative agenda that interferes in the harmless choices of others. You are way too preoccupied with things that other people get up to that don't concern you. Nobody else on this forum is preaching about how people should live. If I may contradict myself and preach for a second, you should focus on your own life, right here, right now, instead of building castles in the air about being married to a Japanese woman. It's almost insulting to Japanese people - how would you like it if someone went after you simply because you are an American man, not because of your innate qualities?

 

[Achilles 1-1]

Laws are made by people, are sometimes incorrect or unjust, and need changing to reflect developments in society. And why the sudden reverence for the law? You seem to be perfectly happy to support a felon leader. It sounds like you're content to live in a society where the lives of the little people are micromanaged by church and state while those in charge do exactly as they please.

It's also not a case of it not being 'really so bad' to share a surname. Some people simply want to retain theirs, and there is no moral reason why they shouldn't. And yes, you are being political. You are slavishly following a conservative agenda that interferes in the harmless choices of others. You are way too preoccupied with things that other people get up to that don't concern you. Nobody else on this forum is preaching about how people should live. If I may contradict myself and preach for a second, you should focus on your own life, right here, right now, instead of building castles in the air about being married to a Japanese woman. It's almost insulting to Japanese people - how would you like it if someone went after you simply because you are an American man, not because of your innate qualities?

You say theres no reason to forbid it, yet I argue that there is no compelling state interest to change it. Give me a reason that doesn't fall under "I don't wanna do the paper work" or "Gender Equality" or "Individuality" and I will reconsider my stance on this. It is not inherently "Incorrect" or "Unjust" to make a law requiring same surnames. I notice—yet again—that you are attacking my political beliefs and even now attacking what I want from my life (who I want to be married to). Which is, to be honest, quite rude and very irrelevant.

If someone went after me simply for being American, I don't listen to nor care about generalizations about my nationality. I'm not going after Japanese people, I'm just seeing no objective reason of why a law should be changed. I also notice you zero'd in on everything you perceived to be wrong with my earlier post and skated over any points I made. It is not wrong to have a law requiring a single surname. As I stated above, the Koseki would probably require a large redesign to account for two different surnames, and could potentially lead to confusion over who is married or not.

Set aside "Individuality" and "convenience" for a moment. Why is the current legal structure unjust now of all times, and why is it unjust now compared to when this law was enacted?

I will tell you the law is on my side here. Both in 2015 and 2021, The Supreme Court of Japan ruled in the favor of one surname, saying it was completely constitutional. Article 750 of the Civil Code of Japan states, quote, "'Husband and wife assume the surname of the husband or wife in accordance with the agreement made at the time of the marriage.'" The subsequent argument for gender equality is effectively nullified by this article, that states it can be either the man or woman's name, meaning the woman makes a conscious choice to take her husbands name, any argument that she doesn't have equality directly contradicts Article 24 of the Constitution, and any examples you may or may not give of the opposite happening are in direct violation of Article 24 by the people, not by fault of the law itself. (meaning if either the husband or wife forced their spouse to take their last name through illegal means, it's their fault, not the laws. Social pressure is not the same as legal inequality.)

Why is it so important to you, and any others, to prioritize individual desire over what is objectively functional for the state and the public welfare? Individual need is not absolute, Articles 12 and 13 of the Constitution explain that the needs of the individual are limited by the needs of society as a whole.

It seems almost every argument you've ever made against me leans on what you perceive to be "morally correct" however, have you considered the objective, legal, and practical side of these topics?

 

[dracuella]

Why is it so important to you, and any others, to prioritize individual desire over what is objectively functional for the state and the public welfare? Individual need is not absolute, Articles 12 and 13 of the Constitution explain that the needs of the individual are limited by the needs of society as a whole.

Which articles are those? Or rather, which constitution are you talking about? The American constitution only has seven articles.

 

[dracuella]

The Japanese one?

Article 12. The freedoms and rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution shall be maintained by the constant endeavour of the people, who shall refrain from any abuse of these freedoms and rights and shall always be responsible for utilising them for the public welfare.

Article 13. All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs.

 

[mdchachi]

The Japanese one?

Article 12. The freedoms and rights guaranteed to the people by this Constitution shall be maintained by the constant endeavour of the people, who shall refrain from any abuse of these freedoms and rights and shall always be responsible for utilising them for the public welfare.

Article 13. All of the people shall be respected as individuals. Their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shall, to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs.

He's correct that the current Supreme Court ruled that the law doesn't violate the constitution. Presumably because it doesn't require that women give up their maiden names, legally it could be either gender although in practice it's the woman who changes her name. While the Supreme Court may rule differently in the future Japan really needs the legislature to get off their asses and change the law. I would bet money that it will happen sooner or later. But they may need to wait for some of the old guard to die off.

 

[dracuella]

Yes, I was merely pointing out that he used Article 12 and 13 to say that:

Individual need is not absolute, Articles 12 and 13 of the Constitution explain that the needs of the individual are limited by the needs of society as a whole.

And I don't see anything like that in people keeping their last names when they get married. There is no 'abuse of freedom', nor does their choice of last name interfere with the public welfare.

Even if his interpretation was spot on, I can't see how 'society as a whole' have any particular needs that would be set aside or unmet by people being allowed to keep their last names when they marry. The two are not mutually exclusive. Society doesn't lose anything, except perhaps the peace of mind of a few ultra-traditionalist dinosaurs, by letting people have the names they want.

While the Supreme Court may rule differently in the future Japan really needs the legislature to get off their asses and change the law. I would bet money that it will happen sooner or later. But they may need to wait for some of the old guard to die off.

If we assume the life expectancy of an average Japanese is 84.. well, we've still got a ways to go

 

[Achilles 1-1]

Yes, I was merely pointing out that he used Article 12 and 13 to say that:

And I don't see anything like that in people keeping their last names when they get married. There is no 'abuse of freedom', nor does their choice of last name interfere with the public welfare.

Even if his interpretation was spot on, I can't see how 'society as a whole' have any particular needs that would be set aside or unmet by people being allowed to keep their last names when they marry. The two are not mutually exclusive. Society doesn't lose anything, except perhaps the peace of mind of a few ultra-traditionalist dinosaurs, by letting people have the names they want.


If we assume the life expectancy of an average Japanese is 84.. well, we've still got a ways to go

It is, in a sense, practical, as to why there is one required surname. Here in America, the family is not registered is a single unit as in Japan, rather as individual people, with birth certificates. To my limited knowledge of the koseki, Japanese family registry, this is not the case, the family is one singular unit, and if dual surnames are allowed, a massive, highly unnecessary redesign of the koseki is sure to happen to account for confusion over who is married. Article 13 says that it goes to the extent of public welfare.

Causing a massive government redesign for a fairly selfish reason (in my eyes) everywhere's with public welfare.

 

[Achilles 1-1]

The time limit to edit elapsed whilst I was in the process of editing it. Here is my edited response

@dracuella


It is, in a sense, practical, as to why there is one required surname. Here in America, the family is not registered is a single unit as in Japan, rather as individual people, with birth certificates. To my limited knowledge of the koseki, Japanese family registry, this is not the case, the family is one singular unit, and if dual surnames are allowed, a massive, highly unnecessary redesign of the koseki is sure to happen to account for confusion over who is married.

Again it really seems that everyone here is obsessed with what they deemed is morally correct vs what is objectively good for the country. Should the government really change how it defines the family simply for the reason that woman feel social pressure in changing their last names to their husbands, when in fact their husband can take theirs? And I will ask again, WHY is the Law 'unjust' now, compared to when it was enacted, as @Lothor alluded too in a previous post?

Let me answer you. It's not. What the real problem is (and I can be sure of this because this is happening everywhere, albeit not in this same situation) Woman feel social pressure, they don't like it, and now they're claiming that social pressure equals legal injustice. As I previously stated, Article 750 of the Japanese civil code says that they can take either last name. This means Article 750 is Gender neutral. Thus, it satisfies the 'equal sexes" part of Article 24 of the constitution.

Should they really dismantle a functional national registry system just to fix a simple matter of social pressure? Thats the same logic of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

The Supreme Court basically said: "If you want this changed, go through the democratic process and have the Diet pass a new law. Don't ask us to declare a neutral law unconstitutional."

If the Supreme Court of Japan is saying 'No, the law is Constitutional, stop bothering us.' Shouldn't that tell you something?

 

[dracuella]

The law is gender neutral in theory only as it is a fact 95% of women take their husbands names. We all know that tradition, peer pressure, societal expectations, etc, can force individuals to make choices in order to 'keep the peace' and not because they actually want to. It may satisfy the 'equal sexes' in the strictest letter of the law but let's not kid ourselves, this is not the lived experience of most women.

Divorce
And then there is the constantly recurring debate about the sanctity of the 'nucleus family'. Divorce rates are on the rise in Japan with 1 in 3 marriages ending in divorce. When everyone is on the same koseki with the same name, what happens when people divorce? Usually it is the mother who keeps the children and, as she has previously changed her name to be on her husband's koseki, she now has to change her name back. And because of this, her children also have to change their names as they are now on their mother's koseki.
Is this not serious disruption of the children's lives, that they now have to change their names because their parents decided to split up? Perhaps even suffer prejudice or bullying by peers in school because of it?

Privacy
It is true that some companies allow people (women, mainly, as we have established) to use their maiden names in a professional capacity. They are still, however, required to use their official names in certain settings and are, as such, forced to give that name to the company. So when their surname changes, they are divulging that they have married, whether they wish to disclose that information or not. Similarly, when they divorce and revert to their maiden name, they are publicly announcing this fact.

But let me answer your question:

Should they really dismantle a functional national registry system just to fix a simple matter of social pressure?

Yes, I believe they should. Amend it to follow the times. I have spent the last 8 years as a systems developer for the Danish government and systems here change all the time, to lesser or greater extents. When the people, the population change, the systems follow these changes.

• When gay marriage was introduced, we changed the systems to reflect this and not just have one of the men written in the 'wife' column.
• When it became possible to change your gender, we allowed for the change of social security numbers since these the numbers in it reflect your gender.
• When people from other countries come here, whether permanently or for a period of time, say, to study, we made it possible for them to get a Danish social security number, because that way we can store things like medical information, certificates, degrees, and such on equal footing with Danish citizens.

I have many more examples but I'm sure you get the gist. My experience tells me that just because something is hard and difficult doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

 

[Achilles 1-1]

The law is gender neutral in theory only as it is a fact 95% of women take their husbands names. We all know that tradition, peer pressure, societal expectations, etc, can force individuals to make choices in order to 'keep the peace' and not because they actually want to. It may satisfy the 'equal sexes' in the strictest letter of the law but let's not kid ourselves, this is not the lived experience of most women.

Divorce
And then there is the constantly recurring debate about the sanctity of the 'nucleus family'. Divorce rates are on the rise in Japan with 1 in 3 marriages ending in divorce. When everyone is on the same koseki with the same name, what happens when people divorce? Usually it is the mother who keeps the children and, as she has previously changed her name to be on her husband's koseki, she now has to change her name back. And because of this, her children also have to change their names as they are now on their mother's koseki.
Is this not serious disruption of the children's lives, that they now have to change their names because their parents decided to split up? Perhaps even suffer prejudice or bullying by peers in school because of it?

Privacy
It is true that some companies allow people (women, mainly, as we have established) to use their maiden names in a professional capacity. They are still, however, required to use their official names in certain settings and are, as such, forced to give that name to the company. So when their surname changes, they are divulging that they have married, whether they wish to disclose that information or not. Similarly, when they divorce and revert to their maiden name, they are publicly announcing this fact.

But let me answer your question:

Yes, I believe they should. Amend it to follow the times. I have spent the last 8 years as a systems developer for the Danish government and systems here change all the time, to lesser or greater extents. When the people, the population change, the systems follow these changes.

• When gay marriage was introduced, we changed the systems to reflect this and not just have one of the men written in the 'wife' column.
• When it became possible to change your gender, we allowed for the change of social security numbers since these the numbers in it reflect your gender.
• When people from other countries come here, whether permanently or for a period of time, say, to study, we made it possible for them to get a Danish social security number, because that way we can store things like medical information, certificates, degrees, and such on equal footing with Danish citizens.

I have many more examples but I'm sure you get the gist. My experience tells me that just because something is hard and difficult doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

It's not just Hard and Difficult, it's unnecessary. If they really didn't want to take their husband's last name, sit him down for a talk, and see if he is willing to take hers. With the amount of liberalism, for lack of a better term, rising, I'd say it'd be easy to find a husband willing to take his wife's last name.

Divorce.
Divorce is a horrible thing, and I feel horrible for any children going through their parents divorce. But honestly, its really not that big of a deal to change your name back.

Privacy.
Marriages in Japan are on public record, however not public knowledge. When a woman, or man, confirms their marital status, benefits come forward including (from what I've seen in my search of what confirming marital status in Japan details) Tax deductions, and Family Health Insurance benefits. Technically speaking, the state knows you are married, so its not like you're marriage is your little secret.

No.

It shouldn't be changed for the small matter of social pressure. Again, and I'm gonna bold this so that it sinks in, Social Pressure Does Not Equal Legal Injustice. It's Gender Neutral, the constitution is satisfied by that. The Supreme Court, again, said: 'No, the law is Constitutional, stop bothering us. Go complain to the Diet, it's not our job to declare a constitutional law unconstitutional'

Although, if I had the choice, bullet points one and two would never have happened if I were in charge, and the person(s) proposing them would be fired, a restructuring of the koseki is much more serious than allowing gay marriage, it is a fundamental restructuring of the entire way Japan identifies a family, it's not a big enough concern to restructure something that important (the Koseki)

 

[thomas]

Clever idea!

A new kind of matchmaking event will take place in Tokyo this spring: every participant will share the same family name. Organisers say the idea is meant for couples uneasy about Japan's legal rule that married partners must adopt a single surname. The concept sidesteps that problem from the outset. If both partners already have the same surname, the question of which name to take after marriage does not arise.

The events are planned from late March to early April. They are organised by Asuniwa, a general incorporated association in Tokyo's Shinjuku Ward that campaigns for a selective separate surname system, and IBJ Matching, a company in the same ward that runs matchmaking parties and similar gatherings. The two groups announced the project on 5 March.

Each session will focus on one surname: Suzuki, Tanaka, Sato or Ito, which are reportedly among the most common with IBJ's clients. Up to 30 people can join per event. Over 90 minutes, groups of four people, two men and two women, chat for 15 minutes at a time, rotating partners after each round. Drinks and food will also follow the theme. The organisers have partnered with 37 companies whose names contain the featured surnames, for example, chocolates from Japanese tea speciality shop Suzukien in Tokyo's Kodaira district or sake from brewery Suzuki Shuzoten Nagaigura in the city of Nagai, Yamagata Prefecture. The goal is apparently to create easy conversation starters around a shared name. Reservations are already open, and applications have begun arriving. Depending on demand, Asuniwa and IBJ say they plan to expand the range of surnames and events as well as develop a new matchmaking service to pair people who share the same family name.

At a press conference, the organisers also presented results from an awareness survey conducted by Asuniwa and the dating app Pairs, run by Eureka Inc. The survey targeted about 2,500 Pairs users in their 20s and 30s and asked about a proposed system that would allow married couples to keep separate surnames.

Just over half of respondents (57.1%) said they were interested in the debate. Among those surveyed, 36.6% of women and 46.6% of men said they felt resistance to changing their own surname after marriage. The survey also asked how people would respond if a partner refused to change their family name. Some 7.3% said they would break up because they did not want to change theirs either. Another 5.9% said they would wait until a separate surname system is legalised.

Japan's surname law for married couples sparks same-name matchmaking parties in Tokyo - The Mainichi

TOKYO -- A new twist on matchmaking is coming to Tokyo this spring: dating events where every participant shares the same family name. The idea is aim

mainichi.jp

関東で出会える婚活パーティー・街コン｜【IBJ Matching】婚活パーティー・街コン運営サイトのIBJマッチング

婚活パーティー・街コンなら東証プライム上場企業が運営のIBJマッチング（サービス名をPARTY☆PARTYから変更しました）個室1対1で話せる婚活パーティーや恋活・友活・趣味コンを全国で開催しており今日明日のパーティーにも参加できます。

www.partyparty.jp

 

[mdchachi]

A male colleague of mine changed his surname to his wife's. I always felt it was kind of a shame because he changed it to an extremely common name. But I guess it was needed for whatever reason -- I assume his wife had no brothers and they must have felt it important to keep the lineage going.

 

[thomas]

In yesterday's parliamentary deliberations, opposition lawmaker Renho clashed with PM Takaichi over the use of dual surnames. Renho stated the case of her own parents, who live in an international marriage. It's always fun to watch Renho debating.

The exchange quickly fell into a familiar loop. Takaichi reiterated that she remained cautious about introducing a system that would allow married couples to keep separate surnames. Her preference, she said, was to expand the practical use of maiden names.

She stressed that the two issues were different. Spouses and children, in her view, should still share the same surname on the family register, even if another name is used in daily life. The government's task, she said, was to remove remaining inconveniences for those using former names as aliases.

Renho challenged the logic, asking what kind of "family unity" remained if the only place where surnames matched was the family register. Takaichi dismissed the premise, citing her own marriage to former Lower House member Taku Yamamoto. She used Takaichi socially and Yamamoto in official records, which she said did not confuse. Renho responded by citing her own background. Her parents are in an international marriage and have different surnames, she said, yet she never felt her family lacked unity. She then asked whether such a family was somehow problematic.

Takaichi did not answer directly. She repeated that the government would focus on making the use of maiden names as aliases more convenient, which she again described as separate from introducing an optional separate surname system.

Takaichi and Renho clash in Diet over dual surname issue | The Asahi Shimbun: Breaking News, Japan News and Analysis

 

[thomas]

When even the conservative electorate clashes with the ruling (conservative) parties:

only 24% of LDP voters oppose dual surnames; however, 63% of LDP Lower House members do.

• Overall, public support for allowing married couples to keep separate surnames stood at 49%.
• The biggest gap appeared inside the LDP: 45% of supporters backed the system, while 63% of LDP lawmakers opposed it.
• Nippon Ishin showed an even larger divide, with 60% of supporters in favour but only 8% of lawmakers supportive.
• Opposition-party lawmakers tended to be more supportive than their voter bases.

Poll: Opposition to dual-surname plan rises among LDP lawmakers | The Asahi Shimbun: Breaking News, Japan News and Analysis

 

[mdchachi]

I guess they have to wait a few more years until some of these old lawmakers die or retire.

 

[Achilles 1-1]

I still honestly don't understand why this is such a big deal. Then again, I don't understand most things I do not care about or support.

 

[dracuella]

I guess they have to wait a few more years until some of these old lawmakers die or retire.

Are we even sure that's enough? I looked at statistics and it doesn't seem as if the average age of the LDP is particularly higher than the rest of the parties

The average age of people who won seats in Sunday's Lower House election was 54.7 years old, slightly younger than in the previous Lower House election in 2024 when the average age was 55.6.

Six winners were in their 20s. The youngest was Nagisa Muraki of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, at 25 years old. Former Prime Minister Taro Aso of the LDP was the oldest, at 85.



The average age of winners stood at 55.7 for the LDP and 52.5 for the Japan Innovation Party (JIP), the LDP's coalition partner.

In the opposition camp, winners were 57.6 years old on average at the Centrist Reform Alliance (CRA), created by the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan and Komeito, 48.7 at the Democratic Party for the People (DPP), 49.0 at Sanseito, 40.2 at Team Mirai and 60.5 at the Japanese Communist Party.

From Japan's Lower House grows younger as the average age of election winners falls

One thing of interest in the article is that:

One hundred and eleven winners* had relatives who served as lawmakers. The LDP had 104 such winners, far exceeding two each for the CRA and the DPP and one for the JIP.
*winners of seats in the Lower House election in Feb. 2026

Potential for a lot of nepotism.

 

[thomas]

Potential for a lot of nepotism.

It's not just a potential. Nepotism and political dynasties with vested interests are a sad reality here.