The Meiji system and its perspective on gender offers a critical lens through which to examine the Japanese government’s increasing consolidation of power from the late 19th to the early 20th century. Meiji policies were not aimed at diminishing women’s significance, but rather at positioning them as neutral, dutiful servants of the imperial regime. This new conception of gender from the 1880s was designed to build pride for the ‘motherhood’ role who would contribute to the state primarily through this task.
Hastings and Nolte contend that women’s roles in the industrialisation of Japan was defined between 1890 and 1911, with a vision of women’s increased productivity to serve a more prosperous imperial state. They are adamant to highlight the distinction in women’s position from the Tokugawa regime, countering the historical perspective that Meiji women’s political oppression was simply a continuation of traditional Confucian beliefs. According to the authors, while Meiji policies were “cloaked in traditional rhetoric, [they] summoned women to contribute positively to the state”1. The shift in rhetoric highlights the increased power of this new government to create an institutionalised role for women. The Meiji bureaucrats were intent on modernisation, meaning that whilst a Japanese woman’s role as a mother was a crucial part of her productive role to the state, it couldn’t exist as her only role. New responsibilities therefore emerged: compulsory education for men and women was introduced in 1873; working-class women were considered the foundations of Japan’s industrial economy, and middle-class women were expected to participate in social events like dinner parties to impress foreign diplomats. These evolving social roles extended beyond the domestic sphere and were intricately tied with imperial politics, highlighting women’s importance to the nation’s progress and global standing. In this utilitarianist framework, motherhood became a broader, more flexible concept, encompassing a range of responsibilities centred on sacrifice and responsibility, all in service to the state’s greater ambitions.
Despite these growing public roles, state propaganda including the use of the ‘good wife, wise mother’ (ryosai kenbo) slogan, was key to singling out women’s ultimate service to the developing nation being within the family system. This is portrayed by officials like Vice-Admiral Kamimura, who asserted at the Tokyo Girls’ Higher School “that their studying to become wise mothers and good wives was equally as valuable to the nation as was his fighting on the sea”2. The family unit was portrayed as a microcosm of the state: if families could learn to obey the head of the household, this was expected to transfer into loyalty to the state. In this way, the family became part of the state apparatus for greater control. Education was a key component to this, as by 1899 a higher school for girls was established in each prefecture, with the sole purpose of this education being to refine their duties in the home within the ‘good wife, wise mother’ ideal3.
However, the reinstitution of gender roles was critical in reinforcing the exclusion of women from political participation. The authors compare women’s societal roles to that of civil servants, whose responsibilities were deemed so vital to the nation’s stability that political participation was inappropriate and disruptive to the social order. However, as Hastings and Nolte articulate, these gendered policies “reinforced the image of women, not as weak and fragile beings in need of protection, but as national assets with particular nurturing skills”4. It highlights that their exclusion from politics was arguably not due to an insinuation that women were physically or mentally weak, however their social value simply did not permit them into this field.
Their evaluation is arguably oversimplified, in my opinion, as it is easy to assume that the regime represented a positive change for women simply by opening up new avenues for them to contribute to the national goals. This is particularly the case in the discussion of the factory workers and the insinuation that government idealised working-class women for their productive power to the nation, when in reality women in the textile mills were subjected to abominable working conditions, often contracting severe illnesses such as tuberculous and being forced to work 12 to 14-hour days. This evaluation is important in including a perspective beyond the Meiji bureaucrats of the late 19th century to evaluate how Japanese women themselves experienced and perceived the shift in their role in society.
In conclusion, Hasting and Nolte offer a critical evaluation of the intersection between gender and industrialisation policies in late 19th century Japan, highlighting the Meiji government’s increasing consolidation of power. The rhetoric of ryosai kenbo perceived motherhood as fundamentally about sacrifice which offered them a more productive role within society with distinct responsibilities, yet justified their political exclusion.