From our other sites
The story
The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare has begun considering fully abolishing the last remaining “women’s protective provisions” in the Labor Standards Act — specifically the restrictions on underground work such as tunnel construction and mining. These provisions date back to the law’s enactment in 1947, when they were meant to shield women, seen as physically weaker, from grueling labor; restrictions on holiday and night work were already scrapped back in 1999. Now the remaining underground-work restriction is also being judged to lack sufficient grounds, since it’s based on sex alone. On 5ch, discussion centered on the historical fact that women used to work in mines before the war, and on how to handle the differing weight-lifting limits set for men and women.
Labor Standards Act’s “Women’s Protective Provisions” Set for Full Abolition, Underground Work Restrictions Under Review… “Banning Based on Sex Alone Lacks Grounds” : Yomiuri Shimbun
It has emerged that the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare is moving to consider fully abolishing the Labor Standards Act’s “women’s protective provisions,” which exist to shield women from grueling work. Under the current rules, only the restriction on underground work such as tunnel construction and mining remained — but the ministry has judged that banning it on the grounds of sex alone lacks sufficient justification.
The Labor Standards Act, enacted in 1947, introduced women’s protective provisions on the premise that women, being physically weaker, needed protecting — restricting them from holiday and night work, and from underground work carried out in harsh conditions. As efforts to eliminate irrational gender gaps progressed afterward, the holiday and night-work restrictions were abolished in 1999.
Source: yomiuri.co.jp / Original article here
What people said
England never had that kind of regulation to begin with, so they had female coal miners.
In the classic novel "Sans Famille" (known in Japan as "Nobody's Boy"), the protagonist also works as a miner, and there's a scene where he — or maybe it was his friend? — gets caught in a cave-in.
Anyway, in "advanced" England, they sent even women and children down into dangerous mines.
Japan discriminated against women by hiding behind excuses like "it'll anger the mountain god."
They kept women away from danger by dressing it up as "it'll anger the mountain god."
Fishermen too, honestly — they were just excluded because it's a dangerous line of work.
Wait, was that one actually already revised too?
There was someone fuming that it's unfair women get menstrual leave and men don't!
They'd even prepared a counter-proposal — that men should get "sperm leave" instead…
Is it really the kind of swing that knocks you flat in bed?
Then again, some men do get wiped out by changes in air pressure.
I think it'd be fine to rename it "unwellness leave" instead of menstrual leave and let anyone take up to 12 days a year.
In North Korea, women still work in the mines.
I feel like that's already pretty normal even now, honestly
Like women climbing high-voltage pylons for the power company to do maintenance work
There are women doing elevator inspection work
They had full-body harnesses on, so I'm pretty sure they were actual inspection staff
The upper-body strength gap between men and women is huge
Honestly it's only about half of a man's, so even 60% sounds pretty rough
For the lower body, since it has to support your own weight anyway, it's more like 70% of a man's strength
things like handling heavy objects, chemicals in the work environment, and provisions for pregnant workers
There used to be all sorts of things like that, right
Like making sure there was somewhere for women to lie down and rest
Workplaces that couldn't manage that just used the changing room for it
Yeah, there's stuff like that
At my workplace, the one-person carry limit was 25kg for men and 18kg for women, I think
Though honestly I can carry like 50kg without even trying
As a feminist husband myself, I don't make women carry heavy things.
Yeah, it's about time that got reviewed too lol
I always figured that's why public health nurses were restricted to women,
but I was shocked to find out recently that male public health nurses actually exist
The only way would be transplanting an artificial womb into a man
Natural birth would be impossible, but
in that case, limited to C-sections, I bet male midwives would show up too
Are there even women who want to do it?
And isn't it dangerous having men and women together inside a mine tunnel too?
That's gender equality for you.
Put another way, it means companies have to keep facilities ready for female underground workers in case someone applies —
separate changing rooms, shower rooms, baths, all split by sex
At that level, both the men and women are already elite, top-class athletes in their sport to begin with
What basketball muscles need is explosive power
What underground-work muscles need is endurance to bear heavy loads over long stretches
Also, being tall is a disadvantage
It's not coal mining, but underground work was brutal for me at 180cm lol
Background and Key Points of This Debate
The women’s protective provisions trace back to the Labor Standards Act’s 1947 enactment, which restricted women’s night and holiday work as well as underground labor on the basis of physical differences. A 1999 amendment scrapped the night and holiday restrictions, leaving only the underground-work restriction in place. What stands out about this latest review is that it seeks to abolish even that remaining restriction on the reasoning that “banning something based on sex alone lacks sufficient grounds” — and it’s easy to miss that this is a separate issue from the weight-handling standards still in effect on the ground (such as the differing weight limits set for men and women). On the thread, opinions split between those who, citing the historical fact that women worked in coal mines before the war, argued that “tightening the rules now would actually be the unnatural move,” and those who raised practical concerns about physical differences and facilities like changing rooms — with more concern voiced over the practical rollout than over the merits of the policy itself.
※This article is compiled and summarized from the 5ch (News速報+) thread “Labor Standards Act’s “Women’s Protective Provisions” Set for Full Abolition, Underground Work Restrictions Under Review… “Banning Based on Sex Alone Lacks Grounds”“.
Leave a Reply