<p>Women “would have their uteruses removed when they turn over 30,” Naoki Hyakuta, leader of the Conservative Party of Japan, said in a stream on his YouTube channel on Friday.</p>
Women “would have their uteruses removed when they turn over 30,” Naoki Hyakuta, leader of the Conservative Party of Japan, said in a stream on his YouTube channel on Friday.
On the channel, he also said that he would make it law for “women who are single after 25 years old not to be allowed to marry.”
(...)
Later, Hyakuta posted an apology on his X account. “I cannot deny that the expressions were too harsh,” he said. “I apologize for those who were offended.”
My assumption is this is to increase the birth rate. The birth rate over 30 is probably lower, and putting a deadline forces you into a FOMO situation. You fear the consequences, so you just get married and have children.
Obviously, this is horrible for human rights (if you consider the rights of women to be human rights, which I at least do). I'm just saying it may be better for births than it appears. It's like video games restricting sale of items can increase sales of them. The human brain is easily manipulated by FOMO, especially with something this severe I'd imagine.
The birth rate over 30 is probably lower, and putting a deadline forces you into a FOMO situation.
I've a heard a similar theory explaining why some (U.S.) Republicans want to ban fertility treatments: FOMO to have kids younger because you might not be able to later.
I personally think this will not work out the way they plan it to, bu there is a twisted train of thought behind it.
That’s true, possibly. I’d hope that whoever translated it would phrase it to preserve the original intent but that’s assuming it was actually a person doing it. Wild times we live in
Its a threat to woman that if they don't get married young and have babies, the government will hurt them.
That it. Do what we say or else. The standard conservative line with women.
With trumps win, expect more of this. Being a complete piece of shit clearly works, so this will only escalate. Getting attention, even by being a vile misogynist, is a winning move now.
This seems to be about oppressing women while uplifting the creepiest sort of men.
To give the maximum benefit of the doubt (which frankly, I don't think they deserve), there's evidence to suggest that birth defects become more likely as the mother gets older. I've always understood that to happen in women of a more advanced age though, 30 is too young to be a cutoff.
Also, women can't marry older than 25? What kind of bass ackwards handmaid's tale bullshit is that? If you want to have a family I guess you've got to hitch your wagon to any horse you can get your hands on. They're so fortunate though that the law doesn't apply to men, so they'll have plenty of creepy fifty year old dudes to choose from.
I think as a rule we should start sterilizing politicians who endorse sterilization. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? Of course, a hysterectomy is quite an invasive procedure compared to a vasectomy, so maybe in the interest of equitability we should begin with castration.
Anyway, this kind of rhetoric isn't really for women - they just happen to be the ones affected by it. For the men that this appeals to, they're probably believe they're more likely to attract a virginal beauty if they start removing women's options. It's truly abhorrent.
women can't marry older than 25? What kind of bass ackwards handmaid's tale bullshit is that?
Japanese instructors in college would tell us how older unmarried women would be referred to as 'Christmas Cakes'--no one wanted one after the 25th. Although they were happy that had been a changing attitude.
A uterus is NOT disposable even when you don't want to have kids - it serves a purpose in women's bodily health. If you need to get it removed for health reasons then absolutely do it, but please don't ever think uterus + breasts serve no purpose when you're not having kids. They greatly participate in the hormonal health of the body & brain, in the lymphatic structure, keeping other organs in their place, and it has been now proven by studies that if you do a hysterectomy when young it greatly affects your risk to get alzheimer's/dementia. This is not to say you shouldn't take care of your reproduction or get yourself sterilized if you want. But patriarchy has already commodified every body part of ours; please, let's appreciate our natural bodies and health and not take it for granted. Please do not think your bodyparts are disposable if you are not having kids. That's what men think. Your body parts are valuable and an important part of YOU. They serve YOU and your health, no-one else. You are not a barbie doll that can have parts taken out without consequences. You do not consist of parts, you are a whole person. You are a lovely, important human, and your health and body parts belong to you. I know we are taught to think about ourselves as a collection of body parts and to nit pick them apart, but I want to stress this is a patriarchal way of thinking. Your womb does not suddenly become irrelevant if you're not in relationships with men. It is still hugely important to YOU.💜
So yeah, as usual, why in the world should anyone except the person with the uterus, getting a say in the matter?
Free tube tying for everyone above 25? I knew about some villages in poor rural India and african countries that did this to limit teen pregnancy and over population. The complete opposite of what Japan is dealing with
A meaningful number of people globally want "revenge" on COVID. They are impotently raging along with the nearest angry person they can attach to. They don't understand their feelings but they feel generally cheated. Many real issues layered on to, but that's the motivating foundation.
They also are failed adults that just want a "daddy" to feel like he will make things better or "beat up" problems on their behalf (or more likely just make them feel like that's happening, regardless of reality).
WTF is even happening in this article? An official / novelist says “women would have their uteruses removed” and there is no additional context? Is he describing a fictional future? What? Why is this presented as some kind of news? What’s this “would” phrasing? Would under what conditions?
Before we panic about the world let’s get some basic context to this drivel. How does sterilizing women over 30 address population decline, even in the most bizarre fictional speculations?
I think that the idea is that by setting a strict deadline after which women can’t have children or marry, they are forced to start a family now or risk regretting it later. That’s the only way I can make sense of this bizarre scenario.
I've been saying it since 2015, but it bears repeating!
The global conservative propaganda machine — lead by the US and Russia — is using all of the data obtained from surveillance capitalism to target, A/B test, and iterate on psychological warfare across social media in real-time (as close to as the platforms allow). The most criminally corrupt and sociopathic benefit the most, as there is no limit to how depraved they will go — bots, lies, disinformation, deep fakes, utilizing actual criminal enterprises and scam operations, illegally obtained data — they will do whatever it takes to succeed.
There really isn't much difference between persuading you to buy a product and persuading you to vote for a political party; they both attack similar weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and the process of building the data pipelines and statistical models is nearly identical. People who knew history were always saying that this is what surveillance capitalism would lead to eventually. I don't think any of us thought it would happen so quickly, but the lack of regulation and highly centralized nature of social media meant that a relatively small operation could access 90% of the Internet using population.
Persuading you to vote for their guy, or if you’re disinclined to do so, persuading you to not vote by instilling disgust/outrage (see also: “Genocide Joe”) or just a blackpilled sense of powerlessness.
And many of us men are just as baffled by it. I honestly don’t understand why there are so many men – who I’m sure shutter at any mention of a woman’s period – that feel the need to control every aspect of reproduction and do so in the most cruel ways.
But also, the women who voted in support of those men are exponentially more baffling to me.
This is how it started in most EU countries: one MP who is an idiot, but gains in representation every election by also taking advantage of the contradictions of governing. These idiots did not use to grow, but now they do...and they are networked too now.
From one seat in my country to almost having a full right wing government in the last elections. Yeah, it's not gonna end well for nobody if this shit keeps going up everywhere.
good point, but I worry about a loop of the media giving attention, making people more aware that this party exists, ignorant people give them more support, repeat. seems like a similar strategy happened in the us with our media giving trump endless headlines.
Right, so to fight the declining birthrate, they entertain the idea that women over 25 should not be allowed to marry. And on top of that, women over the ripe, old age of 30 get their uteruses removed.
I am sure this totally would serve as an incentive to breed more and not at all make existing problems worse.
Right? It doesn't even make sense for their own world view. I kind of suspect a translation mistake, but then again there seems to be no limit to conservative idiocy.
The only way it makes sense is to create an environment where women out of FOMO Mary and give birth early.
Also imagine asking the same thing for men lol these people would lose their mind. But that's just the usual hypocrisy
They reason (and I want to stress that it's their ideology, not mine) that men can keep doing crotchspawn when they are old. So the obvious solution is to force girls to marry and get breeded by men off all ages. /s but unfortunately not so much