Talk:Sayako Kuroda
I have understood that nori no miya sayako naishinnō denka's translation would be: Sayako, female prince (=princess) suo jure of princedom Nori. (As far as anything can be translated fully.) Am I correct in trusting that the abovesaid Japanese wording is in use of her in Japan? (or, why is it mentioned in the text??)
Based on this, my proposition for her article heading is Sayako, Princess Nori 217.140.193.123 9 July 2005 10:53 (UTC)
Birth rate nonsense
"Sayako has quit her job as an ornithologist in order to focus on her family life and potential motherhood, a decision commonly encouraged in Japanese society due to its falling birth rate." Due to its falling birth rate?? Tradtional values maybe. If this is an official statement from Kuroda or the Imperial family please say so. Otherwise, get rid of "due to its falling birth rate".
- Well Japan's shrinking population is a fact, and the idea that Japanese women are encouraged to forgoe professional careers in favour of motherhood is not total conjecture either. This was the article that motivated me to add that, just to be clear: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1115/p06s01-woap.html --Clngre 16:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Speaking as someone who's studied Japanese in Japan, that claim is not total nonsense, but it does not belong in this encyclopedic article. In particular, it oversimplifies Japanese culture. So, I have removed it. --LostLeviathan 18:03, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, good point, I agree. --Clngre 18:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
"left the Imperial Family"
What does it mean that she "left the Imperial Family"? -130.232.65.174 16:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Because she married a commoner, she is no longer in the line of succession. --Golbez 17:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- It means that she must forfeit her royal title, forfeit her right to a royal allowance, and leave the royal palace. At this time, women are not permitted to assume the royal throne in Japan and therefore she was never in the line of succession.
Is she still allowed contact with the Imperial Family, and perhaps attending the occasional Imperial event? --Madchester 18:11, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- As far as I know, she will not "openly" contact the Imperial Family but occasionally may attend events when invited. This contact issue is a result of the current constitution that basically forbids the Imperial Family from taking a political position. Suppose her husband (or herself) runs for a seat in congress (unlikely but possible) and reveals his political view a day (or week, month, year, decade, even century) after she met with the Imperial Family. It will be impossible to argue that there was no discussion of politics. Japanese will then be inclined to support his view out of respect for the Imperial Family (compare with how a Catholic in general would support Pope's view) and arguing against would be impossibly hard. Anyway, except for occasional events when a chance encounter is possible, she will not have contact that we will know of. -- Revth 03:47, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Hm. If she has a son, will he be considered outside the royal line of succession? --Brasswatchman 21:33, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, current laws will keep anyone who does not retain the title to be outside succession. -- Revth 03:47, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
"the Imperial Family"
Was she to marry within the Imperial Family, or is there more than one Imperial Family in Japan? This does not seem fair to me. We all are people of God, what right is it that some demand to be imperial to others. Like bush. Is she still allowed to go to family functions and holidays? I guess some people (her husband) are not allowed to move up in the world.
- And of course someone has to pull the "People of God" crap. She probably left on her own accord, seeing as how the article doesn't mention any hoopla being thrown by her family. I think they normally marry members of government, diplomats or people higher on the social ladder.--Kross | Talk 18:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- One other possibility that occured to me reading this article: is it possible that this is just the way that the Imperial Family works? That daughters are considered to "marry out" of the household, while sons stay in the same household? That would fit with what I know of some traditional Asian cultures. I would appreciate it if someone who knew more about traditional Japanese culture would weigh in. --Brasswatchman 21:32, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- You're right, according to this, they lose their titles as soon as they get hitched.--Kross | Talk 22:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- .........I smell a Disney movie plot. All it needs is a talking animal played by a black comedian and it'll be perfect. Keaton | Keaton 7:32PM 11/15/05
- So true, Keaton, so true... LOL! Dismas|(talk) 09:43, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
So it's because he's a commoner or not?
The sentence "These changes in her status are demanded by a 1947 law that requires female members of the Imperial Family to relinquish their birth position, official membership in the royal family, and allowance upon their marriage." makes it sound like any marriage would mean that the women would have to leave the Imperial Family. So just to make sure I understand this, is it because she married a "commoner" or is it because she simply married anyone that she has to leave the Family? Dismas|(talk) 09:43, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
The 1947 Imperial Household Law states that if a female member of the imperial family (a naishinnō or an nyoō) marries anyone other than the emperor or another male member of the imperial family, she will automatically lose her status as a member of the imperial family. The issue of princess marrying within the imperial family has not arisen since the 1947 law went into effect because the membership of the imperial family was effectively limited to the male line descendants of Emperor Taishō. Only two of that emperor's four sons, Emperor Shōwa and Prince Mikasa, had children and grandchildren. There simply is no pool of potential husbands among the current imperial family members (22 people).
Chapter III, Article 14 of the 1947 Constitution of Japan states, "Peers and peerage shall not be recognized." There are only two classes of Japanese recognized by this constitution: (1) the members of the imperial family, and (2) all other Japanese citizens. Therefore, even the descendants of the Meiji era kazuko (peerage) and the miyake (imperial collateral lines) are legally commoners. User: Jeff 07:25, 16 November 2005
- So wouldn't it be rather incestuous for her to marry one of the Imperial Family? Dismas|(talk) 20:30, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- The imperial family is huge. All royal families have long traditions of marrying distant (and not-so-distant) cousins. When you have a single imperial family tree that has lasted for two millennia, you have a lot of branches. --Golbez 21:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, one of you says that the Imp. Fam. is 22 members strong, the other says it's "huge" with lots of branches. I'm still confused.... Dismas|(talk) 19:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
- The imperial family is huge. All royal families have long traditions of marrying distant (and not-so-distant) cousins. When you have a single imperial family tree that has lasted for two millennia, you have a lot of branches. --Golbez 21:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- Maybe I'm wrong. Shrug. Ask them. --Golbez 20:22, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
A japanese princess has married a commoner
Hooray! -Patrick Beverley