The Commercialization of Obligation: the Story of Japanese Valentine's Day
Valentine's Day, in contemporary popular culture, is supposed to be romantic. Couples, young and old, reserve seats for two in nice restaurants and profess their love once again in moody atmospheres appropriate for the words and occasions. Or perhaps the singletons will gather and denounce the holiday for being pretentious and talk about the difficulties of getting hitched in foreign lands. Either way, the keyword is "romance," a concept that is hard to escape on Valentine's Day, whether one is full of it or completely devoid of it.
The same is more or less true in Japan, where foreign holidays are often enthusiastically adopted, by with a strong local twist. But for the local twist on Valentine's Day, it is often just as likely to draw irritable complaints from the locals as making the holiday more socially acceptable through Japanization. To put directly, Valentine's Day in Japan is more than just romance; it is about the reaffirmation of (non-romantic) social relationships, especially in the workplace, using the practice of giving chocolates as a method of reaffirmation.
Appropriately called giri choco (義理チョコ), or "obligation chocolate," high-priced luxury chocolates are given out to male coworkers by female coworkers in order to maintain social harmony within the group. Given that the tradition has become very established over the past decades, not giving obligation chocolates on Valentine's Day has become more abnormal than giving them. Given the large numbers of employees in major firms where some women work in, just giving out one piece of Valentines-appropriate chocolate per coworker can already be a massive financial burden for females.
While consumers suffer from the obligation to buy and give chocolates, chocolate-makers no doubt benefit from having one day each year when they are guaranteed to move a large volume of high-end products. Along with White Day happening a month later when men reciprocate receiving of chocolate during Valentine's, sometimes with giving of even more expensive chocolates, Valentine's is allowing the country's confectionary makers to benefit from social obligations undertaken by normal people at great financial cost.
As noted in previous posts, Japanese social norms, especially when it comes to corporate operations, can be rigid and difficult to change. But while most are simply annoying, something like the "obligation chocolate" is beyond annoying. In a society where lower-paying women and junior associates in any company must pay respect (thus, give chocolate) to more highly paid men and senior associates, people feeling obligated to give chocolates, if anything, exacerbate income inequality between those who are already relatively deprived.
The problem is that those who are suffering from the social arrangement (e.g. lower-paid women) have little agency in the face of the combined forces of financial incentives and marketing power of the chocolate makers and the corporate rules made by (almost always male) authority figures in their companies, who relish the once-a-year opportunity to have their ego stroked by young females in the office. With no real channels to complain about the situation without negative repercussions related to their jobs, it is difficult for the arrangement to change.
Oddly enough, one thing that might change the culture of obligatory chocolate-giving is the increasing concern for workplace pressure and harassment within corporate Japan. With job-related suicides remaining stubbornly high in the country, the Japanese government and corporate bigwigs are keen to reduce the negative image of employees being forced to do things for the company that leads to a reduction in mental well-being. After focusing on bosses with toxic personalities and ridiculous working schedules, it is time to also pay attention to financially draining activities like giving out chocolates.
Of course, Japan-watchers should not expect giri choco to die overnight. The importance of affirming hierarchical relationships both inside the workplace and throughout society remain strong, so even if chocolates are phased out, some other practice would quickly fill the void. But by highlighting not just the social costs, but the personal financial cost associated with such practices, it is possible to better highlight the paradox of a Japan that claims to be economically equal and one that is still socially hierarchic.
The same is more or less true in Japan, where foreign holidays are often enthusiastically adopted, by with a strong local twist. But for the local twist on Valentine's Day, it is often just as likely to draw irritable complaints from the locals as making the holiday more socially acceptable through Japanization. To put directly, Valentine's Day in Japan is more than just romance; it is about the reaffirmation of (non-romantic) social relationships, especially in the workplace, using the practice of giving chocolates as a method of reaffirmation.
Appropriately called giri choco (義理チョコ), or "obligation chocolate," high-priced luxury chocolates are given out to male coworkers by female coworkers in order to maintain social harmony within the group. Given that the tradition has become very established over the past decades, not giving obligation chocolates on Valentine's Day has become more abnormal than giving them. Given the large numbers of employees in major firms where some women work in, just giving out one piece of Valentines-appropriate chocolate per coworker can already be a massive financial burden for females.
While consumers suffer from the obligation to buy and give chocolates, chocolate-makers no doubt benefit from having one day each year when they are guaranteed to move a large volume of high-end products. Along with White Day happening a month later when men reciprocate receiving of chocolate during Valentine's, sometimes with giving of even more expensive chocolates, Valentine's is allowing the country's confectionary makers to benefit from social obligations undertaken by normal people at great financial cost.
As noted in previous posts, Japanese social norms, especially when it comes to corporate operations, can be rigid and difficult to change. But while most are simply annoying, something like the "obligation chocolate" is beyond annoying. In a society where lower-paying women and junior associates in any company must pay respect (thus, give chocolate) to more highly paid men and senior associates, people feeling obligated to give chocolates, if anything, exacerbate income inequality between those who are already relatively deprived.
The problem is that those who are suffering from the social arrangement (e.g. lower-paid women) have little agency in the face of the combined forces of financial incentives and marketing power of the chocolate makers and the corporate rules made by (almost always male) authority figures in their companies, who relish the once-a-year opportunity to have their ego stroked by young females in the office. With no real channels to complain about the situation without negative repercussions related to their jobs, it is difficult for the arrangement to change.
Oddly enough, one thing that might change the culture of obligatory chocolate-giving is the increasing concern for workplace pressure and harassment within corporate Japan. With job-related suicides remaining stubbornly high in the country, the Japanese government and corporate bigwigs are keen to reduce the negative image of employees being forced to do things for the company that leads to a reduction in mental well-being. After focusing on bosses with toxic personalities and ridiculous working schedules, it is time to also pay attention to financially draining activities like giving out chocolates.
Of course, Japan-watchers should not expect giri choco to die overnight. The importance of affirming hierarchical relationships both inside the workplace and throughout society remain strong, so even if chocolates are phased out, some other practice would quickly fill the void. But by highlighting not just the social costs, but the personal financial cost associated with such practices, it is possible to better highlight the paradox of a Japan that claims to be economically equal and one that is still socially hierarchic.
Comments
Post a Comment