Great that it helps in some way. And sorry you even have to deal with that kind of behavior.
What you’re pointing at connects to something deeper. When recognition in Aikido becomes tied to visible markers like rank, it can unintentionally reinforce hierarchies that already exist, including gender dynamics. In the gender balance piece on Aikicraft, one of the patterns that emerged is that women often have to “prove” legitimacy in ways men don’t. Check https://aikicraft.org/p/what-aikido-community-revealed-gender-balance
If rank becomes a shortcut for being taken seriously, it says a lot about the culture around the practice, not just the practice itself.
Its ambiguous. In my experience men are way faster promoted for gradings than women, even by their own teachers. For a bunch of reasons, too complex for a comment section. There are many aspects of aikido ( for example quality of contact, quality of ukemi) which are not really relevant when it comes to grading. Aspects though, in which female practitioners tend to outperform their male companions on the mat. Yet, many practitioner, male and female alike, tend to value less the teachings of a female sensei, unless she is really high ranked, I.e. „approved“ by an (male) instance they reckognize or follow. So what is better for us women? An unsuitable grading system or no grading at all? This is patriarchy in a nutshell.
I hear you. And I agree, this is not a simple issue, and patriarchy sucks.
What you describe shows how grading doesn’t just measure skill, it shapes what gets valued. If qualities like contact, sensitivity, or ukemi carry less weight, then the system already favors a certain type of practitioner and often a certain type of authority.
And then rank becomes a kind of external validation. Not just of skill, but of who is “allowed” to be taken seriously. Which puts women in a difficult position. Without rank, their teaching is questioned. With it, they’re validated by the same structure that created the imbalance.
So the question may not be grading or no grading, but what exactly grading rewards and signals.
If we don’t look at that honestly, we keep reinforcing the same patterns, even when we think we’re progressing.
"The result, however, must be named honestly: a system originally designed to certify mastery now primarily certifies the payment of fees and membership in a specific organizational chain."
So what. It has surely always been the case that rank doesn't necessarliy reflect ability. There are a lot of talented, skillful, and interesting 3rd dans in the world, and a lot of out of shape and stagnant 6th dans too. You take the good where you can find it, and don't bother with the rest.
Dan rank fees are how we support the Aikikai Foundation -- consider it tithing to support your church. I have no problem with this. You get a nicely printed certificate to frame, and a souvenir passport book. Cool. It's a connection to a worldwide community of (usually) great people, which in today's world is increasingly rare and sorely needed.
I agree with you on the value of connection — there are many great people in this community, and that matters a lot.
Your analogy with the church is actually very fitting. It offers belonging, shared rituals, and yes, even a few souvenirs along the way.
But that analogy also points to something else: institutions like the church have done a lot of good, and also a lot of harm – wars, abuse of power, and other things that were ignored for too long. And progress only started when people were willing to talk about it openly.
I think it’s the same here. Appreciating the community doesn’t mean we should stop asking how the system works, and what it may be harming.
Is the problem with how and on what criteria rank is awarded? Or is the problem dysfunctional organizations where dispensing rank is used as a means to manipulate people?
Undeniably there has been a proliferation of 7th and 8th dan promotions lately -- and accompanying "shihan" accreditations -- some that can really make you scratch your head. But I imagine this is simply a reflection of the generational aging up and aging out in the aikido community. Classic Japanese "nenkō joretsu" stuff.
As far as I know, people are free to ignore the whole thing if they just want to train and not even think about testing or ranking. If you object to giving money to the Aikikai, don't ask for a dan rank from the Aikikai.
Honestly, I don't really see what harm the current system is doing or who is being harmed.
I think both points matter. The Aikikai Foundation isn’t dysfunctional in a chaotic sense. It operates like a business, focused on continuity, revenue, and stability, not on development, teaching quality, or long-term relevance of Aikido.
If we’re talking about the International Aikido Federation, it’s closely tied to the same structure, with Doshu as president, so it follows the same goals, including certificate-driven revenue.
On promotions – yes, aging plays a role. But that’s exactly the issue. When rank follows seniority more than contribution or teaching ability, it becomes political. And that creates divisions and signals what is valued – and what isn’t.
You’re right that people are free to ignore the system. But in reality, the system exists because we collectively sustain it. We pay for ranks, we seek recognition, we reinforce the structure. Like criticizing consumption while continuing to buy.
Fuck the certificates, "souvenir passports," and fuck any system that demands your silence in exchange for a piece of paper. Real community is built on mutual respect and actual skill, not on tithing to a bunch of suits in Tokyo or the Vatican.
What I value most about my rank is: wearing a black belt drastically reduced the amount of mansplaining I receive.
Great that it helps in some way. And sorry you even have to deal with that kind of behavior.
What you’re pointing at connects to something deeper. When recognition in Aikido becomes tied to visible markers like rank, it can unintentionally reinforce hierarchies that already exist, including gender dynamics. In the gender balance piece on Aikicraft, one of the patterns that emerged is that women often have to “prove” legitimacy in ways men don’t. Check https://aikicraft.org/p/what-aikido-community-revealed-gender-balance
If rank becomes a shortcut for being taken seriously, it says a lot about the culture around the practice, not just the practice itself.
Its ambiguous. In my experience men are way faster promoted for gradings than women, even by their own teachers. For a bunch of reasons, too complex for a comment section. There are many aspects of aikido ( for example quality of contact, quality of ukemi) which are not really relevant when it comes to grading. Aspects though, in which female practitioners tend to outperform their male companions on the mat. Yet, many practitioner, male and female alike, tend to value less the teachings of a female sensei, unless she is really high ranked, I.e. „approved“ by an (male) instance they reckognize or follow. So what is better for us women? An unsuitable grading system or no grading at all? This is patriarchy in a nutshell.
I hear you. And I agree, this is not a simple issue, and patriarchy sucks.
What you describe shows how grading doesn’t just measure skill, it shapes what gets valued. If qualities like contact, sensitivity, or ukemi carry less weight, then the system already favors a certain type of practitioner and often a certain type of authority.
And then rank becomes a kind of external validation. Not just of skill, but of who is “allowed” to be taken seriously. Which puts women in a difficult position. Without rank, their teaching is questioned. With it, they’re validated by the same structure that created the imbalance.
So the question may not be grading or no grading, but what exactly grading rewards and signals.
If we don’t look at that honestly, we keep reinforcing the same patterns, even when we think we’re progressing.
"The result, however, must be named honestly: a system originally designed to certify mastery now primarily certifies the payment of fees and membership in a specific organizational chain."
So what. It has surely always been the case that rank doesn't necessarliy reflect ability. There are a lot of talented, skillful, and interesting 3rd dans in the world, and a lot of out of shape and stagnant 6th dans too. You take the good where you can find it, and don't bother with the rest.
Dan rank fees are how we support the Aikikai Foundation -- consider it tithing to support your church. I have no problem with this. You get a nicely printed certificate to frame, and a souvenir passport book. Cool. It's a connection to a worldwide community of (usually) great people, which in today's world is increasingly rare and sorely needed.
I agree with you on the value of connection — there are many great people in this community, and that matters a lot.
Your analogy with the church is actually very fitting. It offers belonging, shared rituals, and yes, even a few souvenirs along the way.
But that analogy also points to something else: institutions like the church have done a lot of good, and also a lot of harm – wars, abuse of power, and other things that were ignored for too long. And progress only started when people were willing to talk about it openly.
I think it’s the same here. Appreciating the community doesn’t mean we should stop asking how the system works, and what it may be harming.
Thank you for your reply.
Is the problem with how and on what criteria rank is awarded? Or is the problem dysfunctional organizations where dispensing rank is used as a means to manipulate people?
Undeniably there has been a proliferation of 7th and 8th dan promotions lately -- and accompanying "shihan" accreditations -- some that can really make you scratch your head. But I imagine this is simply a reflection of the generational aging up and aging out in the aikido community. Classic Japanese "nenkō joretsu" stuff.
As far as I know, people are free to ignore the whole thing if they just want to train and not even think about testing or ranking. If you object to giving money to the Aikikai, don't ask for a dan rank from the Aikikai.
Honestly, I don't really see what harm the current system is doing or who is being harmed.
I think both points matter. The Aikikai Foundation isn’t dysfunctional in a chaotic sense. It operates like a business, focused on continuity, revenue, and stability, not on development, teaching quality, or long-term relevance of Aikido.
If we’re talking about the International Aikido Federation, it’s closely tied to the same structure, with Doshu as president, so it follows the same goals, including certificate-driven revenue.
On promotions – yes, aging plays a role. But that’s exactly the issue. When rank follows seniority more than contribution or teaching ability, it becomes political. And that creates divisions and signals what is valued – and what isn’t.
You’re right that people are free to ignore the system. But in reality, the system exists because we collectively sustain it. We pay for ranks, we seek recognition, we reinforce the structure. Like criticizing consumption while continuing to buy.
As for harm – it’s subtle. It shapes incentives, teaching priorities, and how newcomers perceive Aikido. That’s what I explore in the Dan Economy series. More in Part 2: https://www.aikicraft.org/p/dan-economy-invisible-costs-lost-opportunities
Thanks for engaging — this is exactly the kind of conversation we need.
Fuck the certificates, "souvenir passports," and fuck any system that demands your silence in exchange for a piece of paper. Real community is built on mutual respect and actual skill, not on tithing to a bunch of suits in Tokyo or the Vatican.
This post https://mikhailabdullatif.substack.com/p/aikido-the-pseudo-tariqa-part-i dives deep into the ideological, spiritual, and historical roots of Aikido’s decline.