The Only Woman in the Room: Beate Sirota Gordon, 1923-2012

Beate Sirota Gordon secured her place in Japanese history practically by virtue of being “the only woman in the room.” That room was the ballroom of the Daiichi Building in occupied Tokyo where the American Occupation’s Government Section cobbled together Japan’s new national charter in a week in early 1946; Gordon—then Beate Sirota—was one of four women on the drafting committee, and certainly the youngest of all at a tender twenty-two years of age. Her serendipitous assignment as the only woman in the subcommittee on civil rights, and her temerity during negotiations to translate the document, ensured that Japan’s postwar constitution protected equality between men and women, at work and in the home.

And so, having never even voted, she faced an Underwood typewriter in a ballroom filling with tobacco smoke on which she typed out her radical alterations to the Japanese Civil Code.

The section on women’s rights fell to her with the almost flippant words of her supervisor: “You’re a woman; why don’t you write the women’s rights section?” Her youth made her an unusual candidate to draft a constitution. But she was an unusual young woman. Having lived for ten years in Japan as a child, she had perhaps the most intimate knowledge of Japan and the Japanese language of all delegated the task. The daughter of celebrated pianist Leo Sirota, who had left the anti-Semitism and tumult of Europe for a position in Japan, Gordon was an undergraduate at Mills College in California when she was separated from her parents by war and was forced into self-sufficiency by age nineteen. She managed this by translating for the war effort, and—after a stint at Time magazine as a researcher—her desire to find her parents led her find a position in occupied Japan. And so, having never even voted before herself, she faced an Underwood typewriter in a ballroom filling with tobacco smoke on which she typed out her radical alterations to the previous Japanese Civil Code in which women were “regarded to be incompetent.”

In the final document, which remains effective to this day, Articles 14 and 24 bear her mark. They spell out that: “All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin” (Article 14), and that “Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis” (Article 24).

Gordon’s role in the American effort to draft a new national charter in occupied Japan reflected the idealism of that historical moment. Drafted in secrecy and delivered to the Japanese public as though it was an indigenous document, it attempted to go over the heads of Japan’s conservative bureaucrats and offer the population radical change. In many cases, it was change they were ready for; the popular newspaper the Mainichi had stated that an earlier, more cautious draft of the constitution by the Japanese government showed “no understanding that Japan is in a revolutionary period.” The Occupation-generated constitution was certainly revolutionary. The foreign origins of the postwar constitution—a kind of bestowal of “democracy from above”—is at the heart of contemporary debates about constitution revision. However, progressive support for the constitution within Japan remains strong. It was a product of American New Deal optimism, when the Cold War did not yet dictate U.S. policy. Historian John Dower refers to it as a time of “genuine reformist idealism”: “There are moments in history—fleeting occasions of opportunity—when people actually sit down and ask, ‘What is a good society? How can we bring this about?’”

What resulted was one of the most progressive constitutions in the world. Also known as the “peace constitution,” the postwar Japanese constitution renounces the state’s right to wage war, guarantees the rights of workers to act collectively, and protects academic freedom. It is a document of a brief moment. From 1947 on, the Cold War froze the reformist zeal of U.S. foreign policy in East Asia and the Occupation took a conservative “reverse course.” The struggle between the personnel sector that wrote the constitution and the intelligence sector that monitored its articles foreshadowed the McCarthyism that would sweep American public life in the 1950s: even Gordon, small fry though she was, was implicated in the vitriolic, paranoid, and frequently fantastic notes of General Douglas MacArthur’s “pet fascist,” intelligence chief Charles Willoughby. He called Gordon a “childish,” “almost psychopathic,” “stateless jewess” [sic] with imagined family connections to Richard Sorge, a German communist spy who had relayed intelligence from Tokyo to the Soviet Union in the Second World War. Aside from drawing inspiration from the revolutionary Soviet constitution for its specific protection of the rights of women and children, Beate Gordon’s political views were less leftist ideology than youthful idealism.

The fact that she was so young when she wrote equality between men and women into the Japanese constitution made her reluctant to discuss her history, fearing that it could be used as a reason to alter the text and reduce women’s rights. Almost forty years passed before she was publicly recognized and was able to enjoy the adulation of many Japanese feminists. Her status as a heroine among some is reflected in the title of a recent documentary film on women’s rights in postwar Japan, The Gift from Beate.

Although her presence in rooms in which the postwar Japanese constitution was written and translated guaranteed Gordon a place in Japanese history books, her long life cannot be reduced to that week of work. When Japanese feminist and women’s suffrage activist Ichikawa Fusae visited the United States, Gordon served as her interpreter. And Gordon worked for decades to de-exoticize non-Western cultures for Americans, introducing Asian performing and visual arts to the United States through the Japan Society and the Asia Society in New York City. She also conducted several of the oral history interviews in the Allied Occupation of Japan collection at Columbia University in the early 1960s, including one with Kume Ai, the first woman lawyer to pass the bar in Japan. Kume most likely did not know at the time, as she discussed the changed postwar situation for women in Japan, that she was speaking with the woman who had written those changes into the constitution.

However, as Kume noted during the American Occupation in 1946 in response to radical changes in laws affecting women, “Equality on the face of the law does not always mean equality in actuality.” Implementing real equality in the workplace and the family in contemporary Japan remains an ongoing struggle. And Beate Gordon’s life story captures not just the drama and legacy of a historical moment of incredible change, but also the banal injustices faced by women in the workplace in the 1940s and 1950s in the ostensibly democratic United States. Working for Time magazine in the mid-1940s, she noted in her memoir, The Only Woman in the Room, that “for any mistake printed in the magazine the researcher was held responsible, not the writer. All the writers were men, all the researchers were women.” Noting that many of the female researchers were more than qualified to work as writers, she concluded that “in journalism, America’s much-vaunted freedom did not extend to permitting women the freedom to write the news.” Her job application to IBM in Poughkeepsie, where she moved after returning to the United States and marrying Joe Gordon (chief of the interpreter-translator team for the Military Intelligence Section in the Occupation), was rejected because the company did not hire married women. At the most tedious job she worked, as a translator for a bank, she heard side comments such as one by an older female employee who called a pregnant coworker “disgusting.”

Real equality in both Japan and the United States required not just the protection of laws, but also the courage of people who demanded that the reality matched those laws. The “gift of Beate” made it possible for women in Japan to make demands of their employers and their government. Their victories—for not only women but also other underrepresented groups—are the gifts they win for themselves.

Subscribers can read Chelsea Szendi Schieder’s article in the Winter 2013 issue, “Baby Bust in Japan: Is the Personal Political?

The Last Great Strike - UC Press [Advertisement]

Want to read our Spring issue for free? Sign up for our newsletter by March 31 to receive a full PDF when the issue launches.


The Kurds

[W]hen we refer to all Kurdish fighters synonymously, we simply blur the fact that they have very different politics. . . right now, yes, the people are facing the Islamic State threat, so it’s very important to have a unified focus. But the truth is, ideologically and politically these are very, very different systems. Actually almost opposite to each other. —Dilar Dirik, “Rojava vs. the World,” February 2015

The Kurds, who share ethnic and cultural similarities with Iranians and are mostly Muslim by religion (largely Sunni but with many minorities), have long struggled for self-determination. After World War I, their lands were divided up between Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Turkey. In Iran, though there have been small separatist movements, Kurds are mostly subjected to the same repressive treatment as everyone else (though they also face Persian and Shi’ite chauvinism, and a number of Kurdish political prisoners were recently executed). The situation is worse in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey, where the Kurds are a minority people subjected to ethnically targeted violations of human rights.  

Iraq: In 1986–89, Saddam Hussein conducted a genocidal campaign in which tens of thousands were murdered and thousands of Kurdish villages destroyed, including by bombing and chemical warfare. After the first Gulf War, the UN sought to establish a safe haven in parts of Kurdistan, and the United States and UK set up a no-fly zone. In 2003, the Kurdish peshmerga sided with the U.S.-led coalition against Saddam Hussein. In 2005, after a long struggle with Baghdad, the Iraqi Kurds won constitutional recognition of their autonomous region, and the Kurdistan Regional Government has since signed oil contracts with a number of Western oil companies as well as with Turkey. Iraqi Kurdistan has two main political parties, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), both clan-based and patriarchal.

Turkey: For much of its modern history, Turkey has pursued a policy of forced assimilation towards its minority peoples; this policy is particularly stringent in the case of the Kurds—until recently referred to as the “mountain Turks”—who make up 20 percent of the total population. The policy has included forced population transfers; a ban on use of the Kurdish language, costume, music, festivals, and names; and extreme repression of any attempt at resistance. Large revolts were suppressed in 1925, 1930, and 1938, and the repression escalated with the formation of the PKK as a national liberation party, resulting in civil war in the Kurdish region from 1984 to 1999.

Syria: Kurds make up perhaps 15 percent of the population and live mostly in the northeastern part of Syria. In 1962, after Syria was declared an Arab republic, a large number of Kurds were stripped of their citizenship and declared aliens, which made it impossible for them to get an education, jobs, or any public benefits. Their land was given to Arabs. The PYD was founded in 2003 and immediately banned; its members were jailed and murdered, and a Kurdish uprising in Qamishli was met with severe military violence by the regime. When the uprising against Bashar al Assad began as part of the Arab Spring, Kurds participated, but after 2012, when they captured Kobani from the Syrian army, they withdrew most of their energy from the war against Assad in order to set up a liberated area. For this reason, some other parts of the Syrian resistance consider them Assad’s allies. The Kurds in turn cite examples of discrimination against them within the opposition.