・de-facto marriage

06.03.2021, what I should have said in speaking practice...

an archaic Japanese law

to adopt the same surname

to lose her family name

to find it unfair

to have a choice to retain both

to stop couples holding separate surnames after marriage

a law explicitly discriminates against women

an age-old battle

Surnames have long been contested territory.

to challenge the patriarchal practice

to win the right to use their names

be poised for their own watershed moment

unconstitutional😲

to violate human rights

It was reasonable to use one surname for a family.😵

to respect individual rights

Entrenched cultural expectations view childcare and housework as women's work even if they are employed outside the home.😵

Sexism is rife.👿

to have a poor gender equality record

the shrinking workforce

The gender gap seems to be growing.😥

the proof of women's subordination

the change of surname was hers to bear👿

an unwanted legal surname

surname reform

a watered-down gender equality plan that omitted the surname issue😩

It may destroy the social structure based on family units.😵

to keep their birth name

to disrupts the whole idea of family

to preserve patriarchal control 

to advocate reform

to stifle choice


The couples accused of destroying Japan's families

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55472446