Talk:Demographics of Japan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. |
|
Japan To-do:
|
|
 |
It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in Japan may be able to help! |
[edit] Anti-japanese Sentiments?
"In folk crafts and in right-wing politics, in the new religions and in International management, the Japanese have reinvented their past to interpret the present, for example, by reinventing "Sexually tortured women" into "Comfort Women" or rewriting Japanese History texts terming well documented "massacres" into "incidents" and "300,000 Deaths" into "many people" died [4].
This seems like it is biased against japanese people. And I don't really think it belongs here (demography of japan). Anyone else agree? 129.2.206.65 22:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- I agree. It might be worthy of a separate article on "Historical whitewashing in Japan", but until I see articles on the same subject in other countries, I'd think that was pretty silly as well. Bakarocket (talk) 13:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Improving article
More pedagogical images like population density and other kinds of maps needs to be added to the article. Lord Metroid 07:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Biological Origin
I wonder about the usage of the term race in the article. Shouldn't the usage be restricted to biological terminology, for greater clarity? Since this
"Japanese people are considered to be a homogeneous race but recent studies have shown that the Japanese race is very mixed. It consists of Korean, Altaic, Tungusic, northern Chinese, Polynesian and proto-Mongoloid blood which explains the variety of Japanese facial structures."
seems to be about biological distinctions, only biological usage is appropriate. I would prefer something along the line of
"Japanese people are often considered to be a very homogenous population, but studies have shown (significant) Korean, Altaic, Tungusic, Northern Chinese, Polynesian and proto-Mongoloid influence."
Just a suggestion, I haven't verified how significant the influence of these populations actually was.
[edit] southern Kyushu
About 80 million of the urban population are heavily concentrated on the Pacific shore of Honshu and in southern Kyushu.
The biggest cities of Kyushu (Fukuoka, Kitakyushu) are in the North of the Island. I am not a native speaker of English and therefore I am not sure if "southern Kyushu" means that Kyushu is an Island in the South of Japan. Kagoshima in Southern Kyushu is considerably smaller than Fukuoka.--203.205.193.47 13:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Possible POV copied from public domain
These paragraphs, among others, bother me. They were copied from a US gov't site. They seem accusatory:
If Japanese society is reluctant to readmit returnees, it is even less willing to accept as full members of society those people who are not ethnic Japanese. In 1991 there were 1.2 million foreign residents in Japan, less than 1 percent of Japan's population (if illegal aliens were counted, the number of foreigners might be several times higher than the quoted figure). Of this number, 693,100 (about 57 percent) were Koreans and 171,100 (some 14 percent) were Chinese. Many of these people were descendants of those brought to Japan during Japan's occupation of Taiwan (1895- 1945) and Korea (1905-45) to work at unskilled jobs, such as coal mining. Because Japanese citizenship was based on the nationality of the parent rather than on the place of birth, subsequent generations were not automatically Japanese and had to be naturalized to claim citizenship, despite being born and educated in Japan and speaking only Japanese, as was the case with most Koreans in Japan. Until the late 1980s, people applying for citizenship were expected to use only the Japanese renderings of their names and, even as citizens, continued to face discrimination in education, employment, and marriage. Thus, few chose naturalization, and they faced legal restrictions as foreigners, as well as extreme social prejudice.
All non-Japanese are required by law to register with the government and carry alien registration cards. From the early 1980s, a civil disobedience movement encouraged refusal of the fingerprinting that accompanied registration every five years. Those people who opposed fingerprinting argued that it was discriminatory because the only Japanese who were fingerprinted were criminals. The courts upheld fingerprinting, but the law was changed so that fingerprinting was done once rather than with each renewal of the registration. Some Koreans, often with the support of either South Korea or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea), attempted to educate their children in the Korean language, history, and culture and to instill pride in their Korean heritage. Most Koreans in Japan, however, have never been to the Korean Peninsula and do not speak Korean. Many are caught in a vicious cycle of poverty and discrimination in a society that emphasizes Japan's homogeneity and cultural uniqueness. Other Asians, too, whether students or permanent residents, face prejudice and a strong "we-they" distinction. Europeans and North Americans might be treated with greater hospitality but nonetheless find it difficult to become full members of Japanese society. Public awareness of the place of foreigners (gaijin) in Japanese society was heightened in the late 1980s in debates over the acceptance of Vietnamese and Chinese refugees and the importing of Filipino brides for rural farmers.
Is it POV, well-written, or both? I'm hesitant to do something.--The ikiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说 話し parlar) 14:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- Why do you say it comes from a US Government source? I Googled part of the text and I could not find it anywhere else. Don't accuse others of being accusatory!
- However I think that the article needs to be rewritten. About 30% is about demography and 70% is opinion on a few cute issues, while more relevant topics like population distribution patterns are ignored —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kransky (talk • contribs) 01:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bias and citations?
While I am not disputing the claims in the migration and foreign residents sections of the article. I think that it comes across as very one-sided (critical of Japan) and lacks the usual citations showing external support for the claims made.
[edit] "Discrimination and minorities" section has problems
This section has a lot of vicious anti-Japanese statements, accusations of alleged prejudices and discriminations allegedly practiced by the general Japanese public towards minorities, especially towards nationalities with high anti-Japanese sentiment. These statements are backed up with zero sources cited in the article. That's one problem, but another problem I see is with the awkward section title. There's no section for simply just "Minorities." So, Ryukyuans must be put under Discrimination because it belongs in Minorities. I suggest either:
- A. Spllitting the section into two sister sections "Minorities", and "Discrimination"
- B. Put "Discrimination" as a subsection under "Minorities"
- C. Leave out "Discrimination" for another article in the "See also" section
- D. Rename "Discrimination and minorities" to "Minorities" and keep all the accusations in there
—Tokek 12:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rename from demographics to demography
Please see Talk:Demography#Demographics_vs_demography_confusion and comment.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 19:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Birth Rate section doesn't make sense
The two last sentences of the Birth Rate section don't make sense:
The general concern on a shrinking population in the next 50 years puts a strain in Japanese economic growth and social stability, as some demographers argued that Japan is no longer a very crowded country in terms of Japan's high population density.
What does it mean to be uncrowded in terms of your own population density?
It has been theorized and estimated in demographic research that of the less than 50,000 ethnic Japanese of mainly non-Asian-American descent, either white or African American, are children of intermarriages between American soldiers stationed in the country since after World War II and Japanese women taken as their wives, who stayed in Japan instead of coming with their husbands to America.
This sentence doesn't seem to say anything at all. I think there's a missing number or percentage before "are children of". Unfortunately, I can't supply it. Can anyone help here?
--Joachim Heck (talk) 21:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] love
Ââ₡₡₡₡₡₡₡₡ṢṢṭŐÞ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.196.214 (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Citations needed for claims of greater Chinese influence on Ryukyuan culture
The article presently claims that Ryukyuan culture has been more greatly influenced by the Chinese due to the islands' geographical position relative to the east coast of China and the island of Taiwan. This claim requires a citation, but the one that had been provided (The island dependencies of Japan; an account of the islands that have passed under Japanese control since the restoration, 1867-1912 by Charlotte M. Salwey) did not present any such claim nor any evidence to support such a claim. Ebizur (talk) 20:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
