専修大学社会科学研究所月報
The Monthly Bulletin of Social Science

目

ISSN0286-312X
No. 6362016. 6. 20

次

The Making of the Mainstream Discourse of Sex Education in Japan:
The Role of a Japanese Periodical Sex Education Today (1972-1983)·············· Hiroko HIROSE ····· 1
The purpose of this paper ····················································· 1
The discourse of sex education before the settlement of JASE ························ 3
The settlement of JASE and the publication of Sex Education Today ··················· 3
The base of sex education set on sexology ······································· 4
Keynotes by L. A. Kirkendall but not by Senji Yamamoto ··························· 5Transferring dominant discourse from ‘Purity Education’ to sex education ·············· 7
Building school sex education curriculum ········································ 8Conclusion ································································ 9Secular Changes in Body Height and Weight of Population in Japan since
the End of WW II in Comparison with South Korea ············ Hiroshi Mori ····· 13
Introduction ······························································· 13
Secular Changes in Body Height in the Western Nations ···························· 15
Changes in Body Size of Japanese People after WW II······························ 17
Comparison of Body Growth Patterns of Japanese and S. Korean Children ·············· 19

編集後記 ··································································· 26

doi.org/10.34360/00009219

The Making of the Mainstream Discourse ofSex Education in Japan: The Role of a Japanese Periodical
Sex Education Today (1972-1983)
Hiroko HIROSE
This paper elucidates the making and the characteristics of mainstream discourse of sex education in
Japan, by examining a commercial periodical Gendai seikyouiku kenkyuu (Sex Education Today)
published by Nihon Seikyouiku Kyoukai (the Japanese Association for Sex Education, JASE) from1972 to 1983. The dominant discourse of sex education was transferred from that of‘Purity

Education’ policy, which was introduced by the government after the end of the Second World War,
onto the sexology-oriented sex education lead by JASE. Sex Education Today played a crucial role inthis transfer, by transmitting sex education knowledge from both inside and outside of the country
energetically.

This magazine also played an important role in the building of the structured school

sex education curriculum, which acted as an official curriculum until the government guideline waspublished in 1999. In spite of this remarkable influence of this magazine, it has only rarely been
examined by scholars. Based on its findings, this paper further suggests that, it was not only
‘extreme’ sex education but also the mainstream sex education generally, which was targeted in the
campaign of criticism raised in the 2000s.
Keywords: sex education; discourse; Japan; Sex Education Today; JASE

The purpose of this paper
This paper elucidates the making and the characteristics of mainstream discourse of sex education in
post-war Japan, by examining a periodical Gendai seikyouiku kenkyuu (Sex Education Today) publishedby Nihon Seikyouiku Kyoukai (the Japanese Association for Sex Education, JASE) from 1972 to 1983.
Based on its findings, this paper further suggests that, it was not only ‘extreme’ sex education but also
the mainstream sex education generally, which was targeted in the campaign of criticism raised in the
2000s. The time when this periodical was published, was the turning point of the dominant discourses ofsex education, from that of the ‘Junketsu Kyouiku (Purity Education)’ policy to that ofsexology-oriented sex education, which places importance on biological and anatomical aspects of sex.
This periodical played a significant role in shifting the dominant base of discourse. However, until now,
this magazine has only rarely been examined by scholars, even in Japanese literature.
One of the biggest events about sex education in recent Japan is so called ‘sex education
bashing’, which is a campaign of criticism raised in 2002 (Hirose 2013). This paper recognises that thiscampaign was targeting not only ‘extreme’ sex education but also mainstream sex education generally.
The examination of the mainstream discourse will enable us to confirm this. Among a number of sex
education NPOs in Japan, JASE is the core organisation and is occasionally introduced in English
literatures (McLelland 2015, Fu 2011). However, in order to understand the nature of the campaign ofcriticism, it is equally necessary to spotlight a nationwide NPO ‘Ningen to Sei Kyouiku Kenkyuu
Kyougikai (The Council for Education and Study on Human Sexuality, Seikyokyo)’. Seikyokyo was－ 1 －established in 1982 and has been active in promoting school sex education, holding their four ‘Key
words’, science, human right, independence and coexistence.
It is known that JASE and Seikyokyo were confronted each other, and this conflict was mirrored
into the opposing relationship between their leaderships; Tanomura Yuuki (1923-2009) representing
JASE and Yamamoto Naohide (1932-2000) representing Seikyokyo. They are explained as the two
greatests based on different sex education understandings (Nishigaito 1993: 187). Tanomura, as a former
teacher, became a head teacher after working for a board of education. He devoted much to popularising
sex education, collaborating with the central government as an advisor for their sex education policy. He
joined JASE from its early stages, and substantially led the association since the 1980s. N. Yamamoto1
also joined JASE from its early stages, and established Seikyokyo in 1982 after working as a teacher.
Both contributed articles to Sex Education Today based on their teaching experiences.
It was Seikyokyo that was targeted by the campaign of criticism in the 2000s. The preliminary
stage of this campaign initiated in the 1990s when Takahashi Shirou criticised sex education practices bymembers of Seikyokyo as ‘extreme sex education’, because their teachings, Takahashi claims, contained
information about contraceptives and intercourse, etc. in a positive approach. Takahashi is a right-wingacademic, who sympathises, for example, Valerie Riches in the UK (Takahashi 1993), who is wellknown to have led the Responsible Society (The Family and Youth Concern), fiercely criticising sex
education led by FPA. The conflict between Tanomura and N. Yamamoto was amplified by theappearance of Takahashi, because, Takahashi criticised N. Yamamoto at the same time cooperated
Tanomura in publishing a book (Tanomura & Takahashi 1993).
A series of criticisms led by Takahashi in the early 1990s was an opposition to the positive
spotlights on sex education after the revision of Japan’s national curriculum, Course of Study, in 1989, arevision which was sensationally labelled as the beginning of the first year of sex education by the
media. Although the change in this revision was minor in its content, authorised health education
textbooks were for the first time provided. Members from Seikyokyo were given a high profile in the
media under a favourable spotlight on sex education. Takahashi attacked this positive move.
N. Yamamoto categorised Takahashi as one of the purity education promoters, and wrote
indignantly that his criticism was ‘an abusive ideological campaign led by dogma’ (Yamamoto 1994: 10).
N. Yamamoto categorised Tanomura as one of the ‘purity education promoters’, as well (Yamamoto
1994: 21). Their relationships were then pictured as N. Yamamoto vs. Tanomura & Takahashi.
This configuration, however, misleads us when we need to understand the comprehensive
framework of the discourse of sex education in Japan. It is ineffective to explain the nature of the attackin the 2000s. Although, the framework of N. Yamamoto vs. the ‘purity education promoters’ in the
1990s is similarly observed in the campaign in the 2000s, the target this time was expanded fromSeikyokyo to other providers, including those teachers associated with JASE. Tanomura interpreted thisexpansion as chaotic and unreasonable. He irritably complained by saying that the campaigners targeted
not only ‘extreme’ sex education but also other sex education boundlessly, and regretted that whole sex
education became stagnant (Tanomura 2004, 2006).
Tanomura should be regarded as closer to N. Yamamoto than to Takahashi in their basic－ 2 －understanding of sex education. Both Tanomura and N. Yamamoto stood on the mainstream position ofsexology-oriented sex education, which was created in the early days of JASE, and was still in place.
Takahashi would not approve of sexology-based sex education. The clear disagreement between
Tanomura and N. Yamamoto was, for example, the attitudes towards the teaching about intercourse.
While N. Yamamoto insisted that teaching sexual intercourse was the essential topic, for any age group,
Y. Tanomura insisted that a teacher must be careful in teaching sexual intercourse to elementary school
pupils. The difference observed between Tanomura and N. Yamamoto should be understood as
variations within the mainstream discourse.
JASE, which was substantially led by Tanomura, was involved in the expanded campaign ofcriticism in the 2000s, because the nature of the attack was not the criticism against so called ‘extreme’sex education led by Seikyokyo but against the mainstream discourse of sex education generally,
regardless of whether the campaigners were aware of this or not. To confirm this, it is necessary to
clarify the nature of the mainstream discourse of sex education in Japan.
The discourse of sex education before the settlement of JASE
Sex education in post-war Japan began with the official document ‘Shishou no torishimari narabini
hassei no boushi oyobi hogotaisaku (Measures for the regulation, prevention and protection of private
prostitutes)’ approved by the Jikan kaigi (meeting by all vice-ministers) on November 14 in 1946, a year
after the end of the Second World War. This document aimed ‘to thoroughly realise the intention of theabolition of legitimate prostitutes as well as of all the boundaries on them, and to prevent the appearanceof, so called, ‘Yamino onna (women in the dark)’. Following this notification, Shakai kyouiku
kyokuchou (the chief of the Office for Social Education) in Mombushou (the Ministry of Education)
released a document ‘Junketsu kyouiku no jisshi ni tsuite (On Purity Education)’ in January 1947.
Junketsu Kyouiku Iinkai (The Purity Education Committee), followed by Junketsu Kyouiku Bunka
Shingikai (the Purity Education Division Council) and Junketsu Kyouiku Kondankai (the Purity Round
Table Conference), was set up to advocate the Junketsu Kyouiku (Purity Education) policy.
This policy led by the Office for Social Education in the Ministry of Education, expanded its
concern from prostitutes’ issues to juvenile delinquency then to education for ordinary young men andwomen (Saitoh 2012). In parallel to this policy, sex education was planned for school and practiced inhealth education. However, sex education was not visible behind the Purity Education policy (Tanomura
et.al. 1993: 14). In the 1960s, the Purity Education policy ended after the Purity Education Round Table
Conference was closed. Sex education publication and new activities were left unorganised until the nextmove.
The settlement of JASE and the publication of Sex Education TodayThe establishment of JASE changed the scene. JASE was established on the approval of the Minister of
Education, and was ‘the first and only corporative body for sex education in Japan’ (Mamiya 1981). Oneof the most popular publishers for education, Shogakukan, was the backer of this project. The corefounding members were a sexologist Asayama Shinichi and a medical critic Muramatsu Hiroo, whose－ 3 －liberal thoughts as scientists developed JASE’s philosophy.

A psychologist Mamiya Takeshi, who wasa former member of the Purity Education Round Table Conference, also joined JASE from the
beginning. The ex-Minister of Health and Welfare, Uchida Tsuneo, took the directorial position, and theex-Minister of Education, Kennnoki Toshihiro, became one of the auditors. Asayama, Muramatsu andHayashi Shirou who represented from Shogakukan formed the senior board of directors.
JASE stated its purpose as follows (JASE 1972: 3).
Values and customs related to sex have diversified rapidly, in this transfiguration, not only Japan but
some modern countries are experiencing a large break between young people and adults with theirsexual consciousness and behaviour. We have no arena of dialogue as a measure of common
understanding. In such a situation, it is strongly awaited to obtain desirable consciousness of sex ineach place, such as home, school, and society, and to develop research for proper education
JASE was established with approval of the Minister of Education. We aim to develop
research on sex to contribute to promote a better society, through pursuing the following: 1 building
databases of materials from inside and outside Japan by doing basic survey and research on sex
education; 2 organising conferences, lectures and training sessions; 3 publishing magazines, books
and materials on sex education.
We have built connections with bodies and associations in Europe, the United States andother countries. We wish to contribute to society by providing information, materials and by
developing researches as a representative association of Japan.

One of their main projects was the publication of Sex Education Today. Sex Education Today was
published as a commercial periodical from 1972 to 1983 backed by Shogakukan counting 58 issues,quarterly from Issue 1 to 16 and bimonthly from Issue 17 to 58. For each volume, 2000 copies2 were
issued targeting schools, local government offices, sex educators and medical professionals. Thismagazine, publicising real-time information from JASE, vitally distributed new knowledge of sex
education. The contents of this magazine consisted of information for basic understanding of sex
education, overseas sex education information, sex education school curriculum, governmental topics onsex education, problems related to sex education, surveys relating to sex education, history of sex,
general topics and opinions on sex and so on.
The base of sex education set on sexology
Sex Education Today set its basic framework of sex education on sexology, from the outset. The
keynotes were presented in articles appearing serially in the first and the second issues. One was thelandmark symposium ‘Seikyouiku towa nanika (What is sex education?) (Asayama et.al. 1972a, b)’ andthe other was two pieces of L. A. Kirkendall’s special contribution articles, ‘Gendaishakai ni okeru sei
no yakuwari (The role of sex in modern society) (Kirkendall 1972a)’ and ‘Gendaishakai ni okeru
seikyouiku no yakuwari (The role of sex education in modern society) (Kirkendall 1972b)’.
The participants of this symposium were Asayama, a teaching professional Kurokawa Yoshikazu
and Mamiya from JASE, plus an academic Tada Michitarou. Tada was invited to this symposium
because of his work in Sei (Sex) (Matsuda 1971) published in the previous year, which showed the－ 4 －negative tone against sex education. Therefore, his position in the symposium was to oppose it.
This symposium presented topical subjects for the new stage of sex education, repeatedlyreferring to aspects of sex education, which were social, physiological and biological. Asayama,
Muramatsu and Kurokawa valued knowledge from sexology, and accordingly, placed importance on
biological and anatomical aspects of sex. However, Tada opposed it saying that the understanding of sex
and sex education from the aspect of science or biology is an attitude of‘the limited civilisation

dominated by enthusiasm for science’ (Asayama et.al. 1972a). Tada added that, it was difficult to teachabout sex at school, because, while, sex had an emotional element as its essence, school was an arena
rather to teach analytical academic knowledge.
In spite of their different aspects to sexology, their common understanding of the obstacles toteach biological knowledge about sex was a sense of shame. They demonstrated two types of shame; one
regards sexual intercourse as a shameful act and will work as an obstacle to sex education, and the otheris a shared sense in Japanese culture for respectable human relationship on sex. And what should be
removed, they said, was the former type of shame (Asayama et.al. 1972a).
Another core topic raised in the symposium was the understanding of the peculiar setting of sex
in Japanese culture. Tada made mention of Sweden saying, ‘in Sweden, they seem to have wide freedom,but the reality is they have a solid morality that underpins the monogamous system’, and said ‘on thecontrary, the control is rather loose in Japan’ (Asayama et.al. 1972a: 24). Asayama similarly referred to‘Gedo (heresy)’ culture widely practiced in Japan. He said, ‘Japanese culture comprises of co-prosperityof the face and the back’, and said ‘there was freedom in “Gedo” in the “back” world. Gay and anything
were OK there’ (Asayama et.al. 1972a: 9). The sexological aspect would shape and transfer the ‘Gedo’elements to ‘disorder’ field for examination. This symposium shows the founders were struggling tomodify sexuality elements practiced in Japanese culture into a sexology-oriented sex education
framework.
Keynotes by L. A. Kirkendall but not by Senji Yamamoto
Actual ideas for sexology-oriented sex education were employed from overseas knowledge. L. A.
Kirkendall took the role to present the whole framework of sex education; how to understand sex andhow to build sex education. His special contribution articles ‘The role of sex in modern society’ and‘The role of sex education today’ were carried in the first and the second issue. They contain 10 subjects
that were clarified by sexual science those days, and 10 subjects for sex education problems so far.
The ten subjects Kirkendall presented for knowledge based on sexual science are,
 1, the essence of sex should not be understood related only with sexual consciousness or sexual
activities, but also whole activities,
 2, the significance of being a man or a woman for each individual covers his or her entire life, 3, sexual behaviour represents his or her personality, 4, sexual desires are normal phenomena, 5, masturbation for any age groups should be accepted,－ 5 － 6, sexual activities are responsible for participants and there are no reasons to be bothered byothers, 7, personal relationships do not last long only with physical fulfillment,
 8, sexual activities between opposite sex are occasions for unifying personalities and even can bea ceremony to praise happiness of life, 9, institutions such as marriage do not mean anything for sexual activities, and 10, ‘adultery’ cannot be reformed with force or fear (Kirkendall 1972a).
Those pieces of knowledge presented a liberalism aspect but yet lacked aspect to understandsexual minority. Ten subjects Kirkendall presented for sex education problems so far are; that sex
education
 1, hasn’t been sexuality education but rather education about reproduction or moral,
 2, may suggest certain types of behaviours but lacks adaptive aspects,
 3, has stuck to the fixed idea of ‘truth of life’ knowledge education,
 4, has ignored the idea of active thinking and decision making, 5, has had negative attitude and tried to avoid or to be away from sex,
 6, was tended to be understood as indulgence to solve any moral problems, 7, hasn’t been discussed in public but stealthily, 8, has been very often considered to be the responsibility of merely parents or merely teachers, 9, has taken too much importance from statistical figures but from individual lives, and,
 10, has been understood as mastery performance and relies on only a limited number ofprofessionals(Kirkendall 1972b).

In addition, Kirkendall outlined ten basic rules suggested for sex education, which are; sex
education, 1, is all life experiences, 2, is life-long education. 3, is parents’ attitudes, 4, is a life
philosophy, 5, is a study on family relations, 6, is the embodiment of life respect, 7, is indispensable forhealthy development, 8, does not make unreasonable secrets, 9, is guidance, and 10, values motivation
rather than activities (Kirkendall 1972b). These pieces of information enable us to understand theframework of sex education the magazine held.
Apart from the content Kirkendall presented, we should note the fact that Sex Education Today
invited Kirkendall for its beginnings instead of Yamamoto Senji (1889-1929), who had produced
high-quality research on sexology in Japan. S. Yamamoto is a well-known sexologist, who emphasised
the importance of scientific understanding of sex and gave university lectures very early on; hispublication of Seikyouiku (Sex Education) (Yamamoto 1932) is one of his most popular works.

A

JASE’s founding member Asayama, who was also one of the three winners of the first WAS (World
Association for Sexual Health) Award in 1979, appraised S. Yamamoto by saying ‘S. Yamamoto’s Sex
Education and sexual surveys were far more advanced works than those in Europe and the U. S.
(Asayama 1973)’. However, S. Yamamoto joined the dissident movement, and was purged from his－ 6 －university. At the end, he was assassinated by a right-wing enthusiast. It may be a wise choice for JASE
to rely on a newcomer American instead of the icon, who had the image of being a communist politicaldissident. This enabled JASE to obtain its advantageous position during the period of the cold war andunder the Liberal Democratic Party Government.
Transferring dominant discourse from ‘Purity Education’ to sex education
The relation between the Purity Education launched after the war, and the JASE led sex education
should be clarified. They were not totally discontinuous. This can be said from the fact that Mamiya,
who was a former member of the Purity Education Round Table Conference, and had published a book
Nihon no junketsu kyouiku (Purity Education in Japan) (Mamiya 1969), joined JASE from the
beginning. In spite of its out-of-date image, the Purity Education policy intended to overturn the old
male-dominated relationship in order to promote a democratic society after the war. One of the five
works in the Purity Education series published by the Ministry of Education, Danjyo no kousai to reigi(Male-female association and etiquette), presented progressive ideas for the time, emphasising theimportance of the democratic and healthy relationship between men and women favourable toco-education, which was widely introduced in Japan after the war as a democratic system (Ministry of
Education 1950). Koyama Shizuko suggests that the Purity Education policy was the other side of thedemocratic co-education system (Koyama 2014: 32).
However, the differentiation was emphasised at the time of JASE foundation. Tanomura pointed
to the incompatible elements contained in the Purity Education policy, saying
The first Guidance for the Purity Education (by the Purity Education Committee) was well written
telling young people about what they would encounter. But its supplement made the situation
confused. The chairperson of the Committee explained about “purity” there (Tanomura 1993: 14).

The chairperson wrote in the supplement that ‘sexual intercourse only between a married couple
can be accepted as purity’ (Ministry of Education 1949). Asayama also argued in his book Seikyouiku(Sex Education) that it was not good for this policy ‘to employ the terminology “purity education”
instead of “sex education”’ (Asayama 1967: 3). Because, he says, the word ‘purity’ recalls the physicalvirginity of women and a male-dominated sexual morality (Asayama 1967: 4).
The reason why the Purity Education policy employed the terminology ‘purity education’ waslater explained by Shakai Kyouiku Shingikai (the Council for Social Education) at the Ministry of
Education. They said it was because the terminology ‘sex education’ was not yet popular, therefore, thisword might be taken narrowly from its impression (Ministry of Education 1955). However, apart fromthe intention of the policy makers, the word ‘purity’ reminds us of women’s virginity as well as of
male-dominated sexual morality, as Asayama suggested (Asayama 1967).
In March 1972, when the Ministry of Education was not able to ignore the argument on thepurity education and sex education, they released an announcement on the terminology. In thisannouncement, the Ministry of Education declared that purity education and sex education had nodifferences; they said,－ 7 －The Ministry of Education understands that the meanings and philosophies of purity education andsex education are not different in their essence, and that their purposes and contents are notdistinctive. The Ministry of Education will, therefore, pursue official works based on theunderstanding that the purity education and sex education are synonyms (Ministry of Education
1972).

Sex Education Today Issue 11 (1974.12) ran an explanatory article about terminology.
Introducing the comment by the Ministry of Education, the article added that the cause of the confusion
was not only because of the matter of nuance of the words or the fields they covered, but also of thegradual transition of aspects and attitudes for desirable sex education shared in society. Issue 11(1974.12) as well reported a survey result on the usage of the terminology in local sex education
guidebooks from 40 prefectures and municipalities. The result showed sex education was used in 28
guidebooks and purity education in 9. The official terminology usage for sex education is always a topic
in this field in Japan, until now (Hirose 2013).
In such a terminological situation, Sex Education Today clearly employed the terminology ‘sex
education’. This fact demonstrated the new starting point of the magazine which distinguished itself
from the Purity Education policy.
Building school sex education curriculum
Building a curriculum for school sex education was one of the key projects for JASE and Sex Education
Today. The curriculum proposed by JASE together with articles on curriculum studies by professionals
is carried in every issue of Sex Education Today, covering from kindergarten/nurseries to high schooland special schools. When the Seikyouiku Shidou Youkou (Sex Education Teaching Guidance) was
launched by JASE in 1979, special sections were secured in every issue of the magazine from Issue 39(1980.4) to 49 (1981.12), carrying articles suggesting actual teaching plans based on the guidance. This
guidance, in substance, functioned as an official guidance for sex education nationwide until the
Ministry of Education published Gakkou ni okeru Seikyouiku no Kangaekata Susumekata (How to View
and Practice Sex Education at School) in 1999. Both Tanomura and N. Yamamoto, deeply participatingin building or introducing the guidance to schools, contributed a number of articles as experts.
Teaching about sexual intercourse was a chief subject in curriculum matters in the magazine, anddrew much attention. This topic is featured in Issue 17 (1976.8), 18 (1976.10), 24 (1977.10), 25(1977.12), 26 (1978.2), and 45 (1981.4). In the Issue 18, ‘Karikyuramukenkyuushiriizu: shou-chuu-kou
niokeru seikou no shidoukenkyuu (De-bugging-your-ccurriculum series: Studies on teaching sexualintercourse to elementary, junior and senior high school students)’ consists of four articles, one is by
Tanomura, who presents a general framework for teaching intercourse, followed by three detailed
articles, which cover elementary, junior high and high school.
Tanomura points, in his article, that there are sub factors, which children need to obtain before
they learn about intercourse, and then insists that teaching should not be given in a solitary state but
should be given in a structured curriculum. The article on elementary schools reports that a teacher dealt
with this topic in the ‘my birth’ section for lower age group, in the ‘children’s births’ section for middle－ 8 －age group and in the ‘mechanism of fertilisation’ section for older age group. The article on junior highschools points out that classes without teaching intercourse tend to generate an apathetic atmosphere in
the classroom. The article on high schools, which is written by N. Yamamoto, shows the tendency thatstudents think it is OK to have sex if they love each other.
A serial articles ‘Tankishuuchuu rensaikouza: watashinara kono shudai wo kou shidousuru(Serial intensive course: This is how I treat this subject)’, in Issue 23 (1977.8), 24 (1977.10) and 25(1977.12), contain articles on teaching sexual intercourse, for its elementary section. An article, which
writes about the elementary school division of the 7th JASE summer seminar and the 8th National Sex
Education Conference by Nihon Seikyouiku Kenkyuukai (the Japan Sex Education Research Group) in
Issue 25, elucidates the atmosphere held in the both venues. The report says that it seemed seminar
participants felt it was difficult to teach intercourse. The article introduces arguments saying that there
were many opinions such as ‘It’s not easy to find satisfactory teaching contents’ (Issue 25: 137).
Issue 26 (1978.2) carries ‘Field report: Guidance in a junior high school: What is sexualintercourse for human being?’, and Issue 45 (1981.4) carries N. Yamamoto’s article about a way to teachsexual intercourse to high school students based on the Guidance by JASE.
Considering a number of field studies and trials, Tanomura reaches his position, where he insiststhat it is crucially necessary to be sure about children's readiness in learning when teachings happen, andthat elementary school pupils are too young to accept facts in learning intercourse. He warns teachers
must not handle this topic without confirming children’s development stages; various problems will
occur, otherwise (Tanomura, Takahashi 1993). On the other hand, N. Yamamoto reaches his position,
where he insists that this topic is the essence of sex education. He, therefore, encourages all teachers to
become eligible to teach intercourse (Yamamoto 1994).
Conclusion
Sex Education Today published by JASE, thus, transferred the dominant discourse of sex education fromthat of the Purity Education policy onto sexology and employed a framework picturing the Purity
Education and JASE’s sex education as opposite numbers. The magazine’s intentional usage of theterminology, ‘sex education’ demonstrated the start of an alternative project in sex education in Japan. At
the end, this project formed the mainstream of sex education in Japan. The notable is the role of Sex
Education Today in building a structured curriculum for school sex education. The curriculum
knowledge accumulated into articles in Sex Education Today was effectively utilised in editing the Sex
Education Teaching Guidance by JASE, and its idea and contents were again distributed through themagazine nationally.
Tanomura later recalled the morale and excitement shared by people in those days, when themagazine was launched. He says,
There were a chaotic atmosphere and trial and errors among attendants of the seminars, and they had
impressions that they were liberated, with the background of sexual emancipation trends. It is true,that such was fun. I mean, they had some senses of mission and felt responsible to break down the－ 9 －feudalistic and closed Japanese society. At the same time, they were not actually sure about what
they should be free from, and could not make a clear focus on the target (Uno et al. 1995: 24).

Mamiya similarly points that the transition of sex education base from the Purity Education toanatomical and biological sex education was also modified. He recalls that, in the National Sex
Education Research Conference in 1986, it was confirmed that sex education should be shifted from theone, which give too much weight on the physiological aspect, to sexuality education. Sexuality
education, he states, gives balanced weight on physiological, psychological and social aspects, andovercomes forcing somebody of sexual value, knowledge and attitude but supports him or her to maketheir own decisions (Mamiya 1995: 19).
The mainstream discourse of sex education built in the 1970s continued to be updated adjusting
to social changes. Acquiring a new concept of sexual minority is one of their improvements. Parallel tothe development of the mainstream discourse of sex education, the conflict between N. Yamamoto andTanomura became obvious. However, this conflict was an incident within the mainstream. The campaign
of criticism against sex education occurred in 2002 targeted the two, not because the campaigners failed
to focus the target, but they targeted the mainstream sex education.
Note
1, Initial is added only to Yamamoto, in order to differentiate two Yamamoto.
2, Information from JASE.

Acknowledgements
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI grant Number 24351018. All translations of publications, fromJapanese into English, are the work of the author. The Japanese version of this work is published in the Annual
Bulletin of Institute of Social Science Senshu University (The Shakaikagaku-Nenpo) No.50 (2016).

References
Asayama, S., 1967, Seikyouiku (Sex Education), Chukoshinsho
Asayama, S., 1973, ‘Yamamoto Senji cho ‘Seikyouiku’ no gendaiteki igi : Kaisetsu (Commentary of Sex
Education written by Senji Yamamoto), Sex Education Today, Issue 4 (1973.2)
Asayama, S., Y. Kurokawa, M. Tada, T. Mamiya, and H. Muramatsu, 1972a, ‘What is sex education?’,Sex Education Today,

Issue 1 (1972.5)

Asayama, S., Y. Kurokawa, M. Tada, T. Mamiya, H. Muramatsu, 1972b, ‘What is sex education? 2’, Sex
Education Today, Issue 2 (1972.8)
Fu, Fuiyan, 2011, The bumpy road to secialize nature: sex education in Japan, Culture, Health &Sexuality, Vol.13, No.8
Hirose, H., 2013, ‘Consequences of a recent campaign of criticism against school sex education in
Japan’, Sex Education, Volume 13, Issue 6
JASE, 1972,‘Setsuritsu no goaisatsu (Greeting for the opening)’ in Sex Education Today, Issue 1(1972.5)－ 10 －

Kirkandall, L. A., 1972a, ‘Gendaishakai ni okeru sei no yakuwari (The role of sex in modern society)’,Sex Education Today, Issue 1 (1972.5)
Kirkandall, L. A., 1972b, ‘Gendaishakai ni okeru seikyouiku no yakuwari (The role of sex education inmodern society)’, Sex Education Today, Issue 2 (1972.8)
Koyama, S., 2014, ‘Junketsu kyouiku no toujou – danjo kyougaku to danjo kousai (The appearance ofPurity Education – Co-education and male and female relationships)’, in Koyama, S., K. Akaeda,
E. Imada, ed., Sekushuariti no sengoshi (Post war history of sexuality), Kyoto University Press
Matsuda, M. ed., 1971, Sei (Sex), Chikuma Shobo
Mamiya, T., 1969, Nihon no junketsu kyuoiku (Purity education in Japan), Meiji Tosho
Mamiya, T., 1981, ‘Wagakuni no seikyouiku wa naze teichaku shinaika (Why doesn’t sex education in
Japan become stable?)’, Sex Education Today, Issue 45 (1981.4)
Mamiya, T., 1995, ‘Atarashii jidai no seikyouiku wa kakuritsu shitaka (Whether the sex education for
new era has established) in Wagakuni no seikyouiku 25nen (25 years of sex education in Japan)
by JASE & Zenseiren
McLelland, M., 2015, ‘How to Sex’? The Contested Nature of Sexuality in Japan’, The SAGA handbookof Modern Japanese Studies, SAGA
Ministry of Education, 1949, ‘Seikyouiku no arikata (The way of sex education)’ supplemented toJunketsu kyouiku kihon youkou (Purity Education Basic Guidance) by the Purity Education
Committee
Ministry of Education, 1950, Danjo no kousai to reigi (Male-female association and etiquette)
Ministry of Education, 1955, ‘Junketsu kyouiku no hukyuutettei ni kansuru kengi (A proposal on thethorough diffusion of purity education)’(18th March) by the Council for Social Education
Ministry of Education, 1972, ‘Junketsu kyouiku to seikyouiku no kankei ni tsuite (On the relation
between purity education and sex education)’ awarded on 30th March
Nishigaito, M., 1993, Seikyouiku wa ima (What sex education now is), Iwanamishinsho
Saitoh, H., 2007, ‘Danjo no kosai to reigi no kiso kenkyuu (A preliminary study of the textbook:male-female association and etiquette)’, Journal of Kyoto Seika University, No.33
Saitoh, H., 2012, ‘“Junketsu kyouiku shisaku” mokuteki no bimyou na kakuchou: junketsu kyouiku
iinkai kaisai izen no shakaikyouikukyoku kanryou no hatsugen kara (A subtle shift in the scopeof “purity education” policies: A study based on statements by Social Education Bureau officials
prior to the convening of the Purity Education Committee)’, Journal of Kyoto Seika University,
No.41
Takahashi, S., 1993, ‘Oubei no seikyouiku (Sex education in Europe and the U.S.)’ in Gendai no esupuri(Espri Today), 1993.4, Shibundo
Tanomura, Y., 2004, ‘Dai 34kai zenkoku seikyouiku kenkyuu taitkai kaisai no goaisatsu (Foreword forthe 34th National Sex Education Research Conference), in the handout The 34th National Sex
Education Research Conference in Yamaguchi Prefecture
Tanomura, Y., 2006, ‘Dai 36kai zenkoku seikyouiku kenkyuu taitkai kaisai no goaisatsu (Foreword forthe 36th National Sex Education Research Conference), in the handout The 36th National Sex－ 11 －

Education Research Conference at Kobe University
Tanomura, Y., S. Takahashi ed., 1993, Education of sex and life (Sei to seimei no kyouiku): Gendai no
esupuri (Espri Today), 1993.4, Shibundo
Uno, K., N. Kubota, Y. Tanomura, and S. Miyahara, 1995, ‘Zadankai: seikyouiku no kako, genzai, mirai(Round table discussion: the past, present and the future of sex education)’ in 25 years of sex
education in Japan by JASE & Zenseiren
Yamamoto, S., 1923, Seikyouiku (Sex Education), Naigai Shuppan
Yamamoto, N., 1994, Seikuo: sono riron to kyouiku jissen (Sexual intercourse: theory and practice),
Ayumi Shuppan－ 12 －

doi.org/10.34360/00009220

Secular Changes in Body Height and Weight of Population in
Japan since the End of WW II in Comparison with South Korea
Hiroshi Mori
“It (stature) is a net measure that captures not only the supply of inputs to health but
demands on those inputs.” (R.H. Steckel, Jr. Econ. Literature, 1995, p.1903)
Introduction
A small group of researchers, including the author, in Japan and the United States havebeen engaged in the econometric analyses of food consumption mainly in Japan from theage/generation perspectives (Mori eds., Cohort Analysis of Food Consumption in Japan,
2001; Mori et al., Declining Orange Consumption in Japan: Generational Changes orSomething Else?, 2009; Mori, Saegusa, and Dyck, “Structural Changes in Demand forFoods in a Rapidly Aging Society,” 2016; etc.).
Due to the data source, Family Income and Expenditure Survey, on which we relied, ouranalyses have been focused on at-home food consumption, with little attention to theincreasing eating out particularly among the young generations. And yet, we havediscovered appreciably declining tendencies in per capita consumption of a number ofmajor food products---rice, fresh fish, fresh fruit and vegetables and even milk among theyounger age groups, regardless of sex in the past two or three decades. Per capita at-homeconsumption of fresh fish and fresh fruit, in particular, by non-adults and those young
adults in their 20s and 30s is estimated to have decreased drastically in the past 30 years
or so, as compared to the older generations, which have not changed appreciably inconsumption. As a consequence, those in their teens and their 20s are estimated toconsume around one-tenth of fresh fruit, compared to those in their 60s and above in recent
years. The same phenomenon has taken place for fresh vegetables, although to a muchlesser degree. Per capita at-home consumption of fresh meat has increased moderately overthe period across the board, with the consumption by the high-teens and young adults intheir 20s and 30s only some 10% more than 30 years ago, far less than needed tocompensate for the drastic decreases in fish consumption by these young age groups (refer
to Table 1, for details).

National Nutrition Survey by the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare, initiated at theadvice of the Occupation Forces soon after WW II, started to publish nutrition intakes by
the age groups in the annual report of KOKUMINN EIYOU no GENJYOU (Present

Situation of National Nutrition) in 1995. Per capita total caloric intake from all sources,
including alcoholic beverages, is reported to have increased from approximately 2,100 (kilo)
calories in 1950 to 2,230 calories in the peak period of the early 1970s, and then gradually－ 13 －

－ 14 －

Sources: calculated by Mori, using FIES data with the TMI model.

E: Fluid Milk
(lt/year)
1980-81 1989-91 1999-01 2009-11
26.8
28.3
25.9
19.5
28.8
26.6
22.9
19.1
29.8
26.9
21.8
19.3
27.8
31.4
27.4
21.7
21.3
31.8
33.1
24.5
20.0
32.8
36.7
27.1
21.8
31.9
36.3
28.4
23.0
31.1
34.6
28.8
22.4
32.8
35.2
30.1
23.6
35.7
37.7
32.3
24.6
36.9
40.9
34.8
25.0
37.3
43.5
37.0

D: Fresh Fish
(kg/year)age/year
1980-81 1989-91 1999-01 2009-11
15~19
10.9
7.9
5.0
2.9
20~24
11.4
7.9
5.9
3.7
25~29
12.2
7.9
6.6
4.8
30~34
14.1
10.2
7.9
6.1
35~39
15.4
12.3
9.8
7.4
40~44
15.6
14.6
12.5
8.7
45~49
16.7
17.1
15.2
10.2
50~54
18.6
18.5
18.3
12.1
55~59
19.8
19.1
20.2
14.6
60~64
19.9
19.3
20.3
17.2
65~69
18.5
18.8
19.9
18.2
70~74
17.1
17.8
18.7
17.2
age/year
15~19
20~24
25~29
30~34
35~39
40~44
45~49
50~54
55~59
60~64
65~69
70~74

B : Fresh Vegetables(kg/year)age/year
1980-81 1989-91 1999-01 2009-11
15~19
53.0
42.3
33.5
34.6
20~24
55.0
45.0
38.2
37.4
25~29
56.3
47.4
42.9
41.3
30~34
61.2
51.7
47.1
45.3
35~39
68.3
57.2
51.8
48.8
40~44
75.6
66.6
58.0
52.4
45~49
83.3
76.4
65.5
56.9
50~54
89.2
81.6
75.3
62.9
55~59
91.6
87.0
84.9
71.5
60~64
93.3
90.4
90.7
81.5
65~69
92.1
91.2
93.5
86.2
70~74
85.1
85.0
89.8
85.6

A: Fresh Fruit(kg/year)age/year
1980-81 1989-91 1999-01 2009-11
15~19
29.0
15.4
7.6
4.4
20~24
30.3
16.8
10.3
7.8
25~29
31.5
19.4
13.5
12.0
30~34
39.7
27.2
18.5
15.2
35~39
47.0
36.1
24.3
17.9
40~44
49.8
42.8
31.0
20.4
45~49
53.9
48.4
36.0
24.7
50~54
56.9
51.0
44.4
30.9
55~59
57.4
55.9
51.7
39.3
60~64
58.4
59.3
58.1
48.9
65~69
56.3
59.8
61.2
54.9
70~74
55.5
60.3
62.5
57.6

age/year
15~19
20~24
25~29
30~34
35~39
40~44
45~49
50~54
55~59
60~64
65~69
70~74

F: Rice(kg/year)
1980-81 1989-91 1999-01 2009-11
50.1
29.4
18.3
15.8
38.0
24.9
16.4
13.2
34.1
23.4
18.2
14.2
40.7
27.3
21.2
18.0
48.9
35.1
26.9
22.2
58.1
44.8
32.7
26.3
61.8
50.1
37.4
29.0
60.7
52.6
42.8
31.0
59.6
54.3
48.0
34.7
60.9
53.1
49.9
39.8
59.7
51.2
50.3
43.8
54.2
46.2
46.1
42.3

C : Freh Meats(kg/year)
1980-81 1989-91 1999-01 2009-11
16.2
16.9
16.1
16.8
13.0
13.3
13.4
14.1
12.4
12.2
13.2
13.9
12.9
12.4
12.9
14.4
13.5
13.2
12.9
15.0
13.6
14.5
13.8
15.6
13.5
15.1
14.4
15.8
13.0
14.0
14.6
15.7
12.0
12.9
14.4
15.8
11.7
12.0
13.8
16.1
10.4
10.5
12.2
14.6
9.0
9.0
10.4
12.4
age/year
15~19
20~24
25~29
30~34
35~39
40~44
45~49
50~54
55~59
60~64
65~69
70~74

Table 1 Changes in per capita At-home Consumption of Selected Food Products by Age Groups in Japan, 1980-2010

declined to approximately 2,000 calories in the mid-1990s, and further down toapproximately 1,850 calories, presumably reflecting a significant, rapid aging of the
population.
Over the normal life cycle, ordinary people consume the largest amount of foods in their
mid-teens and total caloric intake per person gradually declines as they age toward theirelderly years. According to the Nutrition Survey age classification, males in the age group,
15-19 years old consume the largest amount of calories, followed by those in their 20s to 50s,
and females in the age group of 7-14 take nearly equal or slightly larger amount than thelate teen age groups. Males in their high-teens of 15-19 are estimated to takeapproximately 2,500 calories per day per person in the mid-1990s and have kept theircaloric intakes almost constantly at this level until 2014, the latest survey year. As will beshown in the subsequent section, Japanese males of 20 years of age have not grown either
in body height or weight during the corresponding years in the past. As they have not eaten
more, they have not grown bigger, or they have ceased growing, because they have quit
eating more. To be exact, the author should be happier, if we could state more specificallythat the young Japanese have ceased to grow for some time in height, in particular, because
they have not learned to eat more properly. As will be shown in the later section, theJapanese young in their early 20s have been lower in body height than the Korean peers byapproximately 4 cm in the recent decade, and 12-13 cm lower than those in the world's
tallest nation, the Netherlands, no to speak of.
Secular Changes in Body Height in the Western Nations
It is widely conceived in Japan that Americans have long been very tall. It is also conceived
that Europeans have long been tall, i.e., vaguely people in North: Sweden, Norway,
Netherlands, etc. the tallest, followed by those in Middle: G. Britain, Germany, Austria, etc.,
and those in South: France, Italy, etc. somewhat shorter than the above nations. As thewesterners are distinctly different in skin complexion from the Northeast Asians, so arethey tall in body height as a racial feature, so to speak. This is the concept which has beencommonly held by many people. However, research contradicts this belief, such as thearticles: "Stature and the Standard of Living" by Steckel; "Economic Growth, Population
Theory, and Physiology" by Fogel, and a few other papers (provided courtesy of Professors
S-W Park, and J-S Moon, pediatricians in S. Korea).
Surprisingly, young male adults in the Netherlands, the currently the tallest nation in theworld, were 164cm, 3cm shorter than those in France in 1850 and that the peers in Sweden
and Norway were 168cm and 169cm, respectively then. On average, Europeans have grown
more than 10cm taller in the past 100 years (Hatton, 2013). The data regarding male bodyheight in the 19th century were mainly based on the military draft exams. Therefore, thestatistics provided in Tables 2-3 and Figure 1 can be relied with certain confidence,
although 1-2 cm differences on both time-series and cross-sectional comparisons should be－ 15 －

Table 2 Secular Changes in Adult Male Stature in The Western Nations, 19th century to 20th Century
(cm)
U.K.

NorwaySwedenFranceDenmark

Hungary

19-I

168.0

―

166.7

164.3

165.4

163.9

19-II

171.6

―

168.0

165.2

166.8

164.2

19-III

169.3

168.6

169.5

165.6

165.3

―

20-III

175.0

178.3

177.6

172.0

176.0

170.9

Source Fogel, "Economic Growth", AER, 84(3), p. 372.

Table 3 Secular Changes in Adult Male Stature in The Western Nations, 1800-1950
U.S.

U.K.

SwedenNorwayNethlands

FranceAus/Hung

1800

173

167

166

166

163

1850

171

166

168

169

164

167

1900

171

167

172

171

169

165

1950

175

175

177

178

178

170

Source: Steckel, "Stature," Ec. Literature, XXXIII, p. 1919.

Fig.1 Adult male height by birth cohort, 1856-60 to 1976-80.
Source: transcribed from Hatton, “Europeans so tall,” p.3.

－ 16 －

163

171

regarded within the statistical errors. The most important fact to be kept in mind is thatthe young male adults have grown more than 10cm taller over the 100 years or so since thelate 1800s in most European countries. Hatton (2013) seems to attribute the growth inbody height, if only statistically, to the fall in infant mortality. The infant mortality rate ismeasured as: the number of deaths within one year after birth/the number of births, which
may reflect the disease environment in the chosen short period. It is, however, questionable
that the fall in infant mortality was “the most important proximate source of increasingheight” (Hatton, p.1). At any rate, one of the key findings in this section is that people cangrow conspicuously in height, regardless of race and geographical locations, if theenvironmental conditions allow it.
Changes in Body Size of Japanese People after WW II
Japanese young males in their 20s were 161.6 cm tall (on average, to be omitted afterword)in 1950 and those in their 30s and 40s, who were in their 20s in 1940 and 1930, respectively
were 160 cm, implying that the young adults had not grown much taller until 1950 or so.
They grew 1.0 cm taller from 1950 to 1960 and grew 3.0 cm taller in the next decade andagain 3.0 cm taller to 168.5 cm in 1980 and grew to 170.7 by 2.2 cm in 1990 and ceased to
grow any taller since then at 171.0 cm in 2010. The young Japanese males grew nearly 10
cm in height during the 50 year period from the mid-20th century. The exact same growth
patterns in height are observed in the young females, i.e., they grew from 150.2 cm in 1950
to 157.3 cm in 1990 and then ceased to grow since then (0.5 cm taller in 2010, probably
within the range of statistical errors).
Those males in their 50s grew taller steadily from 163.2 cm in 1990, to 165.8 cm in 2000
and 168.3 cm in 2010. Those in their 50s in 1990 were born in the 1930s. These cohorts
were in their 20s in 1960 and those in their 50s in 2010 were in their 20s in 1980. With
these cohort aspects taken into consideration, it is fair to state that population in Japanceased to grow in height around 1990 and won't grow any taller from now, unless boys andgirls under 20 years of age now restart growing taller appreciably any more than at present
again for unpredictable reasons in the near future (Table 4).
As regards body weight, Japanese males have grown heavier accordingly in all age classes,
mid-teens, 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70+. Particularly, Japanese males in the middle toelderly age groups seem to have grown heavier in weight relative to height, whereas thosein their mid-teens and 20s have grown only a little heavier since 1990. On the other hand,female population, those in the younger age groups, in particular, have grown much less inweight than the male counterparts. Those in their 20s, for example, grew in height by 7.6
cm from 150.2 cm in 1950 to 157.8 cm in 2010 but they grew from 49.8 kg to 51.3 kg in
weight over the corresponding period. Those in the middle to the elderly age groups,
however, have grown appreciably in weight, like the male peers seen above, as
demonstrated in terms of BMI in Table 5. The female population in their 20s and 30s have
－ 17 －

Table 4 Changes in Body Height and Weight by Age Groups and Sex in Japan, 1950-2010(A)

Height_Males(cm)

age/year

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

4-6

102.6

105.0

108.1

109.1

110.2

109.9

110.8

14-16

152.1

157.8

163.0

165.7

166.6

167.6

167.7

20-29

161.6

162.6

165.5

168.5

170.7

171.1

170.8

30-39

160.4

161.7

163.3

166.0

168.9

170.9

171.5

40-49

159.2

160.0

162.0

163.2

166.5

169.0

170.4

50-59

157.7

158.7

160.0

161.3

163.2

165.8

168.3

60-69

154.4

156.8

157.7

159.1

161.0

162.9

165.3

154.0

154.3

155.5

156.6

158.2

159.7

160.9

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

70+

Weight_Males
age/year

1950

(kg)

4-6

16.58

17.13

18.07

18.63

19.06

18.99

18.89

14-16

44.21

48.44

52.80

55.58

56.80

57.36

56.39

20-29

55.44

56.22

58.74

61.44

64.51

65.47

65.34

30-39

55.04

56.23

59.33

62.24

65.39

68.93

70.13

40-49

54.48

56.01

58.50

61.42

64.46

67.80

70.23

50-59

53.20

54.50

56.63

58.98

62.20

64.97

67.90

60-69

51.29

52.29

54.32

56.41

59.09

62.23

64.70

70+

49.09

49.43

50.79

52.66

55.14

57.77

60.00

(B)

Height_Females

age/year

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

(cm)

4-6

101.6

104.0

107.4

108.4

109.1

108.7

110.5

14-16

148.0

151.1

154.0

156.0

157.0

157.4

157.2

20-29

150.2

151.4

153.3

155.4

157.3

157.8

157.8

30-39

148.8

150.2

151.7

153.4

155.8

157.6

158.2

40-49

147.4

148.8

150.4

151.8

153.5

155.9

157.8

50-59

145.7

147.0

148.3

149.6

151.3

153.2

155.1

60-69

143.5

144.2

145.3

147.1

148.5

150.6

152.3

70+

141.0

140.6

141.6

142.2

144.4

146.2

147.4

Weight_Females(kg)

age/year

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

4-6

16.01

16.60

17.65

18.14

18.58

18.50

18.74

14-16

44.09

46.89

49.30

50.17

50.07

50.46

49.83

20-29

49.84

49.40

50.36

50.78

51.28

51.00

51.26

30-39

49.25

49.24

51.52

51.97

52.72

53.37

53.93

40-49

48.25

49.57

52.01

53.46

53.60

54.73

55.40

50-59

46.69

47.87

50.61

52.05

53.50

54.40

54.30

60-69

44.80

45.73

47.78

49.85

51.73

53.47

53.40

70+

41.82

42.41

44.03

45.79

47.69

49.33

49.93

Sources: Health and Labor Ministry, National Nutrition Survey, various issues.

－ 18 －

Table 5

Changes in BMI by Age Groups and Sex in Japan, 1950-2010(A)

BMI_Males

age/year

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

5

15.74

15.53

15.45

15.64

15.69

15.71

15.38

15

19.12

19.46

19.86

20.24

20.47

20.41

20.05

25

21.24

21.26

21.45

21.63

22.14

22.36

22.40

35

21.40

21.51

22.26

22.58

22.92

23.60

23.85

45

21.50

21.88

22.30

23.05

23.25

23.73

24.19

55

21.39

21.64

22.11

22.66

23.35

23.63

23.97

65

21.52

21.27

21.84

22.28

22.80

23.44

23.69

20.70

20.76

21.01

21.48

22.05

22.66

23.19

75

BMI=(weight in kg)/(height in meter)2

Notes:

age 5=ave(4:6)
age15=ave(14:16)
age25=ave(20:29)
age35=ave(30:39)
age75=ave(70+)
each annual year=3 year average, like 1950=ave(1949:1951)●(B)

BMI_Females

age/year

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

5

15.51

15.34

15.30

15.45

15.60

15.67

15.34

15

20.13

20.55

20.78

20.61

20.32

20.37

20.17

25

22.08

21.55

21.43

21.03

20.71

20.48

20.59

35

22.24

21.83

22.40

22.09

21.71

21.50

21.56

45

22.20

22.39

23.00

23.20

22.76

22.52

22.24

55

21.99

22.15

23.02

23.27

23.38

23.18

22.58

65

21.77

21.99

22.63

23.03

23.46

23.57

23.02

75

21.04

21.45

21.97

22.66

22.87

23.07

22.97

Sources: calculated by the author, using the data in Table 4:

been consistently declining in BMI, from 22.1 and 22.2 in 1950 to 20.6 and 21.6 in 2010,
respectively. The authors hear that young Japanese women, not few in number, areexcessively concerned about "dieting" without good reasons.
The author has been told by the medical professionals that what matters in BMI is thetendencies in the percentage or distribution of obese or near-obese people in population of
any age groups, regardless of sex. This paper cannot dig into this topic, due to the absenceof data and the author's analytical inability in this field.
Comparison of Body Growth Patterns of Japanese and S. Korean Children
A few months ago, the author came across a short story in Chosun Ilbo on the internet,"high-school senior boys in Korea have stopped growing in height but keep growing inweight,"(February 25, 2016). He had been well aware of the similar phenomena in Japanfor some time, but when he compared the reported average height of senior boys at 173.5－ 19 －

cm at the 2015 School Children Health Survey with that of Japanese peers, boys of 17
years of age, reported in the 2013 National Nutrition Survey, he was shocked to realizethat the Korean senior male students were 3 to 4 cm taller (on average, to be omitted
afterward) than the Japanese boys of the same age in 2010-13.
By the courtesy of Chosun Ilbo reporters, the author was able to communicate withProfessors Soon Woo Park and Jin-Soo Moon, who administered the 2015 school healthsurvey. Prof. Moon was very kind to send him the related data and a couple of important
literatures in the field of anthropometric analyses. With very little background in clinicalnutrition, physiology, physical education, etc., he tried his best to compile as reliable
statistical data as possible on secular changes of body size of children by broad age
categories in Korea and Japan from 1965 to present.
The surveys of body size by age have been conducted across the country every year since
the end of WW II in Japan, whereas the survey on body size in Korea has been conducted inconjunction with school health surveys on selected years only, as he presumes. Although
the sample sizes are quite large in both countries, the number of children in each age cell,classified by one year bracket is limited, with substantial variance in survey data, e.g.,mean height of boys of 15 years of age in 2004, 2005, and 2006 are 167.8, 169.5 and 166.8
cm, respectively and mean height of boys of 14, 15, and 16 years of age in 2005 are 165.9,
169.5, and 168.2 cm in the National Nutrition Surveys. For the purpose of smoothing, meanvalues of height of boys in 14, 15, and 16 years of age in three years of 2004, 2005, and 2006
are simply averaged to represent that of 15 years old boys in 2005 for the Japan’s case andthree age classes are simply averaged in a single year, 1965, 1975, 1985, 1997, and 2005,
respectively, in Korea as published in the survey articles provided by Professor Moon.
Table 6-A and Table 6-B provide the secular changes in (mean) body height of boys and girls
from 5 year olds to 20 year olds from 1965 to 2005 in Korea and Japan, respectively.
With minor differences in detail ignored, at least two distinct features should be stressed.
Koreans have become taller by 3-4 cm than Japanese at the age of 20 years at present,
either males or females. They were the same in height in the mid-1980s, boys at 170 cm
and girls at 157 cm, respectively. Koreans kept growing taller and Japanese ceased to growin height since then. In the mid-1970s, at the age of 15 years old, Japanese boys were 164.2
cm, nearly 6 cm taller than the Korean peers. They aged to their mid-20s in 1985, where
both Koreans and Japanese were the same in height, 170 cm, implying that Korean boys
grew substantially faster than Japanese boys after the age of mid-teens during that period.
Exactly the same thing took place in the last decade of investigation, i.e., both Korean andJapanese boys at the age of 15 years old were the same in height at 167 cm in 1997 and theformer grew to 174.4 cm and the latter to 171.5 cm in 2005. In the related literatures, we
often come across the technical word of “adolescent growth spurt” in height growth (Murata
and Hibi, 1992, pp.94-95; Kouchi,1996, pp.332-334; etc.). Observing the growing patterns ofJapanese boys, they seem to have been following (on average) this concept. In this respect,－ 20 －

Table 6-A
year

Comparisons of Body Height by Age Groups of Male Children:
Korea and Japan, 1965 to 20051965

1964-66

1975

1975-76

1985

1984-86

1997(cm)
1996-98

2005

2004-06

age_yr. old

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

4-6 ave

100.9

107.4

104.5

108.6

108.0

109.4

109.6

109.3

110.9

110.1

9-11ave

128.2

133.4

131.7

136.1

135.3

137.2

138.1

138.3

141.6

138.6

14-16 ave

156.0

161.6

158.6

164.2

163.5

166.1

167.2

167.3

170.0

167.4

19-21 ave

168.8

165.4

168.4

167.4

170.1

170.6

173.3

171.2

174.4

171.5

Table 6-B

Comparisons of Body Height by Age Groups of Female Children:
Korea and Japan, 1965 to 2005
1996-98

2005

2004-06

year

1965

1964-66

1975

1975-76

1985

1984-86

1997

(cm)

age_yr. old

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

4-6 ave

100.2

106.1

103.3

107.8

107.5

108.7

108.5

108.8

109.8

109.5

9-11ave

128.0

134.1

131.9

136.8

135.8

138.3

138.0

139.2

142.1

139.5

14-16 ave

152.2

153.2

153.9

154.8

155.8

156.3

158.9

156.7

159.7

157.0

19-21 ave

155.8

153.7

157.1

155.0

157.4

157.0

160.3

158.2

161.5

158.5

Notes: simple averages of 19 and 20 years olds for Korea.
Sources: Ji-Yeong Kim et al., 2009 for Korea and National Nutriton Surveey, various issues for Japan.

Korean boys seem to differ distinctly from the Japanese peers.
Girls mature a few years earlier than boys, i.e., their puberty starts a couple of years
earlier than boys and their physical maturity is reached around 17-18 years of age, a few
years earlier than boys. Therefore, a slightly different age classification should be preparedfrom that for boys. The absence of professional knowledge in this area prevents us frompreparing the tables with different age classification in this article. As early as in 1965,
Japanese girls at the age of 15 years old were 153.2 cm, 1.0 cm taller than the Korean peers
but 10 years later in 1975 Japanese girls at the age of 20 years old were 155.0 cm, 2.1 cm
shorter than the Korean peers then. Again in 1985, the Japanese girls of 15 years old were156.3 cm, 0.5 cm taller than the Korean peers then but in 1997, Korean girls of 20 years ofage were 160.3 cm, 2.1 cm taller than the Japanese peers then.
Table 7-A and Table 7-B provide the secular changes in (mean) body weight of boys andgirls from 5 year olds to 20 year olds from 1965 to 2005 in Korea and Japan, respectively.
Compared at the maturity age of 20 years old, in 1985 either Korean boys or girls were thesame in weight as the Japanese peers: boys at 61 kg and girls at 51 kg. Some 10 years later,in 1997, Japanese boys at the age of 15 years old were 56.7 kg, only 1.2 kg lighter than the
Korean peers who were 57.9 kg. Again 10 years later in 2005, Korean boys at the age of 20
years old were 70.8 kg, 6.9 kg heavier than the Japanese peers. The similar phenomena areobservable, i.e., in 1985, Japanese girls of 15 years old were 50.1 kg, 0.9 kg heavier than the
Korean peers. But in 1997, Korean girls of 20 years of age were 55.3 kg, 4.0 kg heavier thanthe Japanese peers, who were 51.3 kg then.

－ 21 －

Table 7-A

Comparisons of Body Weight by Age Groups of Male Children:
Korea and Japan, 1965 to 2005

year

1965

1964-66

1975

1975-76

1985

1984-86

1997

1996-98

2005

2004-06

age_yr. old

kr

jp

kr

jp

kr

jp

kr

jp

kr

jp

4-6 ave

15.8

17.7

16.7

18.3

17.9

18.7

19.1

18.6

19.9

18.7

9-11 ave

25.7

29.5

27.3

31.8

29.5

33.0

34.7

34.4

39.1

34.4

14-16 ave

45.1

51.1

46.9

54.4

51.9

56.4

57.9

56.7

64.2

57.5

19-21 ave

58.2

57.0

58.7

59.1

61.1

61.8

66.3

63.2

70.8

63.9

(kg)

Table 7-B Comparisons of Body Weight by Age Groups of Female Children:
Korea and Japan, 1965 to 2005

(kg)

year

1965

1964-66

1975

1975-76

1985

1984-86

1997

1996-98

2005

2004-06

age_yr. old

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

Kr

Jp

4-6 ave

15.6

17.1

16.1

18.3

17.4

18.3

18.5

18.6

19.2

18.6

9-11 ave

25.9

29.6

27.2

31.8

29.6

33.1

33.8

34.0

37.6

34.0

14-16 ave

44.0

48.0

46.4

49.3

49.2

50.1

52.5

49.9

54.7

51.0

19-21 ave

51.3

50.3

51.6

50.2

51.7

50.8

55.3

51.3

55.7

51.7

Notes: the same as Table 6.
Sources: the same as Table 6.

What can be presumed to have caused these differences? The author can claim withconfidence that anything related to racial matters is no answer; per capita net national
income cannot be an answer again, because Japan is even today a little greater than Korea
in net per capita income, despite the long-lasted economic stagnation after the Japan's
economic bubble burst in the early 1990s.
In the past month or so, what caught his mind is Original Article: "South Korea's entry to
the global food economy: shifts in consumption of food between 1998 and 2009," Asia Pac J

Clin Nutr 2012 (Lee, Duffey, and Popkin). The authors emphasize that one of the uniquefeatures of food consumption in Korea is that vegetable intake has remained high, with
Kimchi the largest contributor to vegetable consumption: its per capita consumption has
risen steadily since 1969, increasing from 58 g to 117 g/day in 2009 (p.619). In addition, thedaily per capita intake of fruits has also been increasing over time, with particularly rapidchange in the 1990s. In 1995, 146 g of fruits were consumed, and this is almost a 10-foldincrease from the 18.9 g consumed in 1970, and this trend has continued until 2009 (p.622);
see Table X and Table XX in Supplemetary Data for details. These changes in the Koreandiet in the past few decades are just opposite to what has been taking place in Japan overthe same period in at-home food consumption, particularly among the younger age groups,
as we briefly mentioned in the Introduction (Table 1).
It was only yesterday while drafting this last section, when the author came across thestatement, “recent epidemiological studies have shown an association between fruit andvegetable intakes with the bone density in both young and elderly subjects,” Prospective
Cohort Study by Sugiura and his colleagues, 2012, which refers to “ fruit and vegetable－ 22 －

intakes and bone mineral density,” by Prynne et al., 2006; “fruit and vegetable consumption
and bone mineral density,” by McGartland et al., 2004; etc. A sincere appreciation goes to
Dr. M. Maotani who kindly introduced Dr. Sugiura to the author last week.
References
Chosun Ilbo. Chosun Online in Japanese.
Fogel, Robert W. (1994) "Economic Growth, Population Theory, and Physiology: The Bearing ofLong-Term Processes on the Making of Economic Policy," The American Economic Review, 84(3),369-395.
Haas, J.D. and F. Campirano (2006) "Interpopulation variation in height among children 7 to 18 yearsof age," Food and Nutrition Bulletin, 27(4):supplement, S212-S223.
Hatton, Timothy J. (2013) "How have Europeans grown so tall?" Oxford Economic Papers (AdvanceAccess published September 1), Oxford University Press, 1-24.
Japanese government, Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare. National Nutrition Survey, various
issues.
――Bureau of Statistics, Family Income and Expenditure Survey, various issues.
Kim, Ji-Yeong, Jin-Soo Moon, S-H. Shin et al. (2008) “Anthropometric Changes in Children andAdolescents from 1965 to 2005 in Korea,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 136,
230-236.
Kouchi, Makiko (1996) "Secular Change and Socioeconomic Difference in Height in Japan,"

Anthropological Science: J. the Anthropological Society of Nippon, 101(1), 325-340.
Lee H-S, K.J. Duffey, and B.M. Popkin (2012) “South Korea’s entry to the global food economy: shifts in
consumption of food between 1998 and 2009,”Asia Pac J Clin Nutr, 21(4), 618-629.
Malcolm, L.A. (1974) "Ecological Factors Relating to Child Growth and Nutritional Status," inNutrition and Malnutrition: Identification and Measurement, eds. A.F. Roche and F. Falkner,
New York, Plenum Press, 329-52.
Maotani, Touru. Former Administrator, National Institute of Fruit Tree Science, Tsukuba, Japan.
McGarland, C.P., P.J.Robson et al. (2004) “Fruit and Vegetable Consumption and Bone Mineral
Density: Northern Ireland Young Hearts Project,” Am. J. Clin. Nutr., 80, 1019-23.
Moon, Jin Soo (2011) “Secular trends of body sizes in Korean children and adolescents: from 1965 to2010,”Korean Journal of Pediatrics, 54(11), 436-442.
Mori, Hiroshi eds. (2001) Cohort Analysis of Japanese Food Consumption―New and Old Generations,Tokyo, Senshu University Press.
Mori, H., D. Clason, K. Ishibashi, Wm.D. Gorman, and J. Dyck (2009) Declining Orange Consumption

in Japan: Generational Changes or Something Else? Economic Research Report 71, Economic
Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Mori, H., Y. Saegusa, and J. Dyck (2016) “Structural Changes in Demand for Foods in a Rapidly Aging
Society,” in Food Consumption: Health Risks, Social influences and Current Issues, New York,
Nova Science Publishers (in press).
Murata, M. and I. Hibi (1992) "Nutrition and the secular trend of growth," Hormone Research in

Pediatrics, 38(Supl.1), 89-96.
Murata, Mitsunori (2000) "Secular trends in growth and changes in eating patterns of Japanesechildren1'2'3," The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 72(5), 1379-83.
Park, Soon-Woo (2016). Professor, Department of Preventive Medicine, Catholic University of Daegu
School of Medicine, Republic of Korea, Personal Communications.
Prynne, C.J., G.D. Mishra et al. (2006) “Fruit and Vegetable Intakes and Bone Mineral Statues: A－ 23 －

Cross Sectional Study in 5 Age and Sex Cohorts, "Am. J. Clin. Nutr., 83, 1420-1428.
Reidpath, D.D. and P. Allotey (2003) "Infant mortality rate as an indicator of population health,"

Journal of Epidemiol Community Health, 57,3４4-346.
Rona, Roberto J. (2000) REVIEW "The Impact of the environment on height in Europe: conceptual andtheoretical considerations," ANNALS OF HUMAN BIOLOGY, 27(2), 111-126.
Steckel, Richard H. (1995) "Stature and the Standard of Living," Journal of Economic Literature,
XXXIII, 1903-1940.
Silventoinen, Karri (2003) "Determinants of Variation in Adult Body Height," Journal of Biosocial

Science, Cambridge University Press, 265-285.
Sugiura, M., M. Nakamura, K. Ogawa, Y. Ikoma, and M. Yano (2012) “High Serum Carotenoids
Associated with Lower Risk for Bone Loss and Osteoporosis in Post-Menopausal Japanese Female
Subjects: Prospective Cohort Study,” PLOS ONE, December, 7(12), 1-9.

Supplementary Data:
Tables X and XX provide changes in per capita supply of fruits in selected countries from1965 to2010.
Table X Changes in per capita supply of fruits* , selected countries, 1965 to 2010(kg/year)
Nethtlands

SwedenUSA

UK

R. Korea

Japan

1965

74.43

72.34

76.19

58.72

9.86

39.00

1975

84.64

85.80

100.92

54.96

14.63

61.87

93.83

75.44

109.13

64.80

1980

23.25

1985

35.13

1990
1995

144.42

82.02

111.16

78.85

69.60

2000
2005
2010

51.88

46.98
53.24

69.56
131.58120.19109.75119.16109.84102.74127.02

76.12

60.31

123.30**50.82**

69.17

Notes: * fruits for wine excluded; ** 2009-2011averages for Korea and Japan.
Sources: FAOSTAT: Food Balance Sheets.

Table XX Changes in per capita supply of orananges・mandarins and apples,
selected countries, 1965 to 2010(kg/year)
Nethertlands

SwedenUSA

UK

R. KoreaJapanoranges apples oranges apples oranges apples oranges apples oranges apples oranges apples
1965

20.05

26.30

17.72

18.59

22.45

12.75

9.50

13.22

0.04

5.23

12.28

10.26

1975

25.80

30.55

26.35

23.91

41.03

14.45

11.54

12.81

1.87

7.16

30.94

7.30

1985

28.89

30.52

18.60

22.05

37.01

23.12

14.12

15.96

9.61

11.63

21.08

6.82

1995

54.55

32.14

24.93

15.34

39.65

20.01

18.10

16.90

25.75

14.75

14.18

14.14

2005

40.20

28.44

33.62

25.09

30.89

23.67

40.40

29.65

23.16

7.37

12.35

19.64

2010

27.04

25.02

47.89

19.86

27.98

24.78

37.54

28.01

20.47*

5.29*

10.00*

15.27*

Notes: oranges include mandarins; * 2009-2011 averages for Korea and Japan.
Sources: FAOSTAT: Food Balance Sheets.

－ 24 －

Acknowledgement
The author is grateful to John Dyck, an economist at the Economic Research Service, theU.S. Department of Agriculture, for his considerate comments and thorough editing.

－ 25 －

執筆者紹介
ひろ せ

広瀬
もり

森

ひろ こ

裕子
ひろし

宏

本学文学部教授
本研究所研究参与〈編集後記〉
本号では、戦後日本社会の断片を捉えた２本の英語論文を掲載した。
１本目は、「The Making of the Mainstream Discourse of Sex Education in Japan: The
Role of a Japanese Periodical Sex Education Today (1972-1983)」（邦題仮訳「日本の性教育の主要な言説の作られ方：「現代性教育研究」（1972−1983）の役割」）と題する広瀬論文である。広瀬氏は、詳細な文献調査から、1972 年から 83 年にかけて日本性教育協会が発行した「現代性教育研究」が、大戦直後の純潔な性教育から、その後の性科学に基づいた性教育へと転換していく際に重要な役割を果たしたことを示している。
２本目は、「Secular Changes in Body Height and Weight of Population in Japan since theEnd of WW II in Comparison with South Korea」（邦題仮訳「日韓比較を通じた戦後日本人の身長と体重の長期的な変化」）と題する森論文である。森氏は、年代ごとの一人あたりの食品消
費支出、西欧諸国の身長の長期的な変化、戦後の日本人の体格の変化、子どもの成長パターンの日韓比較など豊富なデータを示しながら、我々の食生活や体格の変化を示している。
上記のようなユニークな両論文の内容について、当該分野の研究者にとっては、貴重な論考
や記録となるものと推察する次第である。編集後記担当は門外漢ではあるが、小学生の頃に受けた性教育を思い返したり、先日訪ねた高知城の襖柱が自分の身長より低かったことを思い返したりしながら、興味深く拝読させていただいた。
（K.S．）

2016 年 6 月 20 日発行
神奈川県川崎市多摩区東三田２丁目１番１号

電話(044)911-1089

専 修 大 学 社 会 科 学 研 究 所
The Institute for Social Science, Senshu University, Tokyo/Kawasaki, Japan
（発行者）
製

作

村 上 俊 介佐藤印刷株式会社

東京都渋谷区神宮前 2-10-2 電話－ 26 －(03)3404-2561