Job Discussion Forums

[PAULH]

In a follow up to the recent thread on foreign men and Japanese women, where there seemed to be heated debate about the pros and cons of Japanese partner/version caucasian/American partner and after some strife on the home front I was just wondering how many guys here are married to Japanese and /or American women and have either

1. found that the relationship has not turned out they thought it was and the images and perceptions of Japanese women/wives has changed re: roles within the relationship and as a husband
2. Things have not changed all that much from before marriage?
3. Anybody found that the physical affection aspect diminishes after marriage and kids with a Japanese wife (I have certainly found that out for myself) What do the american women here say?

Let me set the stage for you from an article i found on intercultural relationships. Feedback would be appreciated and there may be something in here thinking of taking things to the next level with J-girl.


We believe that there are important cultural differences
in the patterns of marital and family relationships
described above.


Preoccupied-dismissing relationships: Instances in which
the "... mother begins to experience her intimacy within
her relationship with the child rather than with her
husband, and the father turns his energy to his job..."
are viewed as maladaptive if not pathological in the West
(Marvin & Stewart, 1990, p. 80). The combination of
"overinvolved" mother-child ties and distance between
spouses is much more common in Japan, but it has a
different meaning and consequences because it is
societally sanctioned. A common expression in Japan,
"Teishu tassha de rusu ga ii," expresses mothers' wish
that the father stay healthy and cheerful, but away from
the home. Though Japanese mothers increasingly want
husbands to share household and childrearing
responsibilities, this phrase expresses mothers'
adaptation to the demands of their husbands' work.


?
Many Japanese fathers continue to spend long hours away
from home. A study of middle- to upper-middle-class
fathers indicated they spent 54 hours a week at work not
including many evening and weekend hours, as contrasted
with 42 hours in the US (Ishii-Kuntz, 1993). In addition,
more than twice as many Japanese (37.4%) as U.S. (14.7%)
fathers claim they "never" engage in father-child
interaction during weekdays--the corresponding figures on
weekends are 17.1% and 5.1% (reported in Ishii-Kuntz,
1993). The Japanese fathers' lack of guilt about their
limited interaction could be seen as further indication of
their dismissiveness; yet, "they seem to think that their
hard work is appreciated by their family, and therefore
worth their absences from home" (Ishii-Kuntz, 1993, p.
55). Paternal distance is also a vehicle for maintaining
one's role as an authority figure (Ishii-Kuntz, 1993).
Thus, fathers' distance has a very different and less
negative meaning in Japan than in the US.


There are several features of preoccupied/ambivalent
attachment that are likely to have more aversive
consequences in the West than in Japan. Ambivalent women
are most likely to endorse items such as "I can't seem to
stop from mothering my partner too much" that are viewed
as compulsive caregiving and as intrusive in the West
(Kunce & Shaver, 1994). These women prefer unqualified
closeness, commitment, and affection, and tend to idealize
their partners (Feeney, 1999). No doubt this is why
conflicts with their romantic partners are so intense and
why they need to transfer their compulsive caregiving and
unqualified closeness to the infant. In Japan, where
romance is expected to abate after marriage and children
(evidence reviewed below), and where extremely close
relationships with infants are sanctioned, women with
behavior labeled preoccupied in the West are likely to be
better prepared for the diminished closeness with their
romantic partners, and to find a socially sanctioned
outlet for their need for emotional and physical
closeness. These findings suggest that behaviors labeled
preoccupied and dismissing in the West may be more common
and less maladaptive in Japan.


Based on a review of Western studies, Davies and Cummings
(1994) propose that child wellbeing is fostered when
children have a secure model of the parents' relationship.
That is, children's security may depend in part on
parents' attachment to one another. Since distance between
spouses is more accepted in Japan than the US, Japanese
children may view such relationships as more secure,
highlighting the complexity of the link between perceived
security of parents' relationship and child functioning.
What counts as a secure model of the parents' relationship
is likely to vary across culture. Moreover, in Japan, a
secure model of the parents' relationship may be
relatively less important than a secure model of the
family relationship, which may involve grandparents and
even ancestors (Klass, 2001), as well as the nuclear
family (cf. Marvin & Stewart's, 1990, discussion of the
secure family base).


There are other reasons why Japanese spouses who engage in
behaviors labeled preoccupied and dismissing in the West
may fare better than their Western counterparts. First, in
all cultures, preoccupied and dismissing parents are
unlikely to experience verbally intimate, romantic
relationships, but the Japanese place less value on such
relationships. Second, when behaviors associated with the
preoccupied-dismissing spousal relationship occur in
Japan, they are less likely to be accompanied by open
conflict. Open conflict has very negative effects on the
marital relationship (Gottman, 1991), and highly
deleterious effects on children (Davies & Cummings, 1994).
These points are elaborated upon, below.


Romantic relationships: Here we review evidence that
secure adult relationships in the West are based on very
different characteristics than are secure adult
relationships in Japan.


In the West, marital relationships are seen as secure when
they are based on romance, verbal intimacy, and sexuality.
Attachment theorists provide abundant evidence linking
security with romance in adulthood. There is much more
research on attachment between sexual mates than between
any other adult partners (e.g., same-sex friends or blood
relatives). The reason for this emphasis is clear: "Bowlby
claim[ed] ... that sexual partners assume the role of
attachment figures in adult life," and, in subsequent
research by other investigators, "the common practice [has
been to use] romantic relationships as the context for
investigating adult attachment phenomena" (Hazan &
Zeifman, 1999, p. 340).


In Japan, there is greater valuing of close relationships
that are based on harmony (i.e., mutual accommodation,
absence of conflict, and enduring loyalty) than on
relationships based on romance, verbal intimacy, and
sexuality (Yamagishi & Yamagishi, 1994). Since romance is
difficult to sustain overtime (beyond a few years), it is
not particularly conducive to enduring, committed, and
guaranteed relationships. While romantic relationships
before marriage are highly valued in Japan as well as the
US (Bando, 1992), it is only in the US that romantic love
continues to bind mates even after marriage and children
(DeVos, 1985; Dion & Dion, 1993; Iwao, 1993). In Japan,
there is less emphasis on romance after marriage and
children and more emphasis on loyalty and commitment (4)
(Rothbaum, Pott, et al., 2000). Whereas U.S. marital
partners continue to emphasize physical attraction and
eros, in Japanese marriages romance is diluted by
pragmatic and dependency needs (reviewed in Rothbaum,
Pott, et al., 2000).


In Japan, mutual attraction, and other needs of the dyad
(e.g., for intimacy), are not viewed as the most important
criteria for preserving a marriage. When asked about a
couple that wanted to get divorced, 93% of Japanese, but
only 39% of Americans, said that the couple should stay
married just for the sake of the children (Soumuchou,
1987). Even if they are estranged, Japanese couples tend
to stay together in the same home for the sake of the
children (katei nai rikon refers to divorce within the
family home). In Japan, stability of marital relations
relates more to complementarity in roles, successful
rearing of children, and participation in wider kin ties
and less to refueling passion (Imamura, 1987; Iwao, 1993;
Vogel, 1996). According to Jing Hsu: "the core
relationship in the ... Japanese family is not that of the
husband and wife, as in the Caucasian families, but that
between the parent and the child" (Hsu, Tseng, Ashton, et
al., 1987, p. 357). The greater emphasis on the
mother-child dyad and lesser emphasis on the marital
relationship in Japan than in the US makes behaviors
associated with the preoccupied-dismissing partnership
less problematic in Japan.


Romance and parental roles: Clearly defined role
relationships contribute to the loyalty and stability of
mate relationships in Japan. Traditionally, the wife's
sphere has been inside the home, especially when children
are young. As soon as the first child is born, husbands
and wives refer to each other as otoosan (father) and
okaasan (mother), reflecting the primacy of their parental
roles. In Japan, wives' and husbands' roles and
responsibilities center on the family, including
grandparents and ancestors as well as the child, rather
than centering on each other. Western partners' focus on
their dyadic relationship may explain why they experience
so much marital distress shortly after the birth of a
child (reviewed in Belsky & Rovine, 1990).


A study of marital partners conducted by the Japanese
Association of Sex Education (1987) indicates that
Americans, more so than Japanese, attribute successful
marriages to factors having to do with the dyad--i.e.,
partnership, intimacy, fidelity, sexual satisfaction,
sharing of concerns and activities, and romance. This same
study indicates a much greater percentage of American than
Japanese partners who report couple-related activities,
including recreation, going out together as a couple, and
sexual intercourse. The difference between US and Japanese
adults mentioning "enjoyment between the two" is a
striking 70% (see Durrett, Richards, Otaki, et al., 1986,
for similar findings). Taking the focus off the marital
dyad is likely to reduce the negative consequences of a
partnership that Western investigators label
preoccupied-dismissive.


Family life in Japan has changed in profound ways over the
last 50 years, and continues to undergo transformation.
For example, the Japanese Government has become
increasingly concerned with fathers' absence and has shown
interest in increasing men's involvement with their
children (reported in Ishii-Kuntz, 1993); and intimacy
between marital partners is more common. Yet, we believe
that underlying patterns remain intact. While fathers are
more involved in care of children than previously,
adolescents in Japan spend only a third as much time with
their fathers as American adolescents (Sengoku, 1994). And
while intimacy (sinmitsu) is more emphasized in Japan
today, the word is rarely used. A person who feels
intimacy toward another would be unlikely to put the
feeling into words; the Japanese believe that if feelings
are deep, you do not need to put them into words.


Romance and its effect on the child: Because sexuality and
romance are so central to the marital dyad and are so
intertwined with spouses' attachment in the West, it is
not surprising that issues of sexuality and romance tend
to emerge in other family relationships. This is seen, for
example, in child-parent attraction, (i.e., oedipal and
electra phenomena), which appear to be relatively common
in the US (Watson & Getz, 1990). In Japan, the family is
less a locus of romantic relationships. Lebra (1994), a
Japanese psychologist, notes that Western investigators
are prone to mistakenly interpret commonly occurring,
close bodily contact between Japanese parents and young
children (e.g., co-sleeping and co-bathing) as having a
sexual element to it. Similarly, Allison (2000) describes
a Japanese TV show for children depicting maternal
*beep*, which she notes are likely to be viewed as sexual
by American, but not by Japanese, audiences.


The Japanese find the association between sexuality and
maternal care difficult to comprehend because, for them,
the sexual and attachment systems are not closely linked;
the link is weak in the marital dyad (i.e., after children
are born), and it is irrelevant in other familial
relationships. As a result, if children do become
triangulated by their parents, and a too-close
parent-child relationship develops, that relationship is
unlikely to have sexual overtones.


Romance and the wider social network: The relatively
lesser emphasis on the marital dyad in Japan may be
associated with the relatively greater reliance on
same-gender friendships to obtain emotional intimacy.
Japanese mothers are more likely to say they would consult
with friends (42%) than with husbands (18%) when they have
concerns about childrearing (Hokkaido Private Kindergarten
Association, 1997). While corresponding figures are not
available from the US, they are likely to differ because
of the emphasis on maintaining the closeness of the
marital dyad (e.g., Gottman, 1999). The wider network of
supports available in Japan may reduce pressure on the
marital partnership and may render the negative
consequences of marital distance less severe than in the
US (cf. McLoyd, Harper, & Copeland, 2001, for a similar
point regarding ethnic minority families in the US). For
these reasons, behaviors commonly associated with the
preoccupied-dismissive pattern may have different
implications for family dynamics and child functioning in
the two cultures.


Parental conflict: A major cultural difference in marital
relationships is that, in the West as compared to Japan,
conflict is far more common. Marvin and Stewart (1990)
assume that "there will be frequent conflict within the
family regarding how proximity and contact will be
organized" (p. 365), and Byng-Hall (1999) suggests that
conflict among family members and expression of anger is
"a functional part of family life" (p. 627). Attachment is
seen as providing a safe base for family members to engage
in conflict (Byng-Hall, 1999). While Western authors
believe that high levels of conflict are dysfunctional,
especially if the conflict is not resolved, moderate
levels that are resolved are considered benign or even
adaptive. The belief in the normality of conflict, which
is widely accepted by family systems theorists (e.g.,
Nichols & Schwartz, 1998; Satir, Stachowiak, & Taschman,
1975), is supported by findings from Western
studies--e.g., limited amounts of disagreement and angry
exchanges are not harmful to relationships (cf. Gottman,
1999) and, when conflicts are resolved, they are not
harmful to children (reviewed in Davies & Cummings, 1994).


Open conflict in the family is much less common in Japan,
and even low levels of conflict are less accepted. Ninety
percent of Japanese report arguing with spouses less than
once a month (Long, 1996). In Japan, direct communication
is avoided because it leads to open conflict, which is
seen as unhealthy, even when it is not extreme (Hsu et
al., 1987; Rothbaum, Pott, et al., 2000). "Because one of
the ways of maintaining group cohesiveness and harmony is
to avoid open conflict, the clear and straightforward
statement of one's own opinions and feelings may risk
confrontation and possible conflict, therefore, less
direct and perhaps even somewhat evasive communication are
more adaptive in [East Asian] cultures" (Hsu et al., 1987,
p. 357).


CONCLUSION


Summary and Elaboration


There are important points of convergence between
attachment theory and family systems theory, but some of
the dynamics about which they agree may operate
differently in non-Western cultures. Attachment
investigators' description of preoccupied mothers and
ambivalent children contribute in important ways to our
understanding of enmeshed mother-child dyads--a major
concern in the family systems literature. Attachment
investigators' research on partners with preoccupied and
dismissive styles provides evidence of the kinds of
pursuer-distancer cycles and spousal conflicts that family
systems theorists have long considered important elements
in enmeshed relationships. Attachment theory has much to
tell us about the antecedents, stability, and consequences
of these attachment styles, and about the underlying needs
for protection and care that characterize mothers and
children, and marital partners, who are engaged in these
patterns.


However, the evidence comparing Japan and the US indicates
that many of the behaviors associated with these insecure
attachment styles have different meanings (i.e.,
evaluations and interpretations) in the two countries.
Japanese mothers are expected to form extremely close,
even symbiotic relations with their children; they value
behavior that, by US standards, is overinvolved,
intrusive, and overindulgent of dependency needs, and that
has been shown to foster insecure (ambivalent) attachment
in Western children. Japanese children are expected to
exhibit extreme expressions of need for care and
attention, extensive clinging and proximity seeking,
helpless dependency, passivity, blurring of boundaries
between self and other, and other behaviors associated
with ambivalent attachment in the West. Despite this
manifest similarity in overt behavior, the underlying
meaning of the behavior is very different.


Similarly, spousal patterns of behavior that are
associated with insecure attachment in the West,
particularly the wife who engages in compulsive,
dependency-fostering caregiving, and the workaholic
husband who spends little time at home, are more common
and are viewed as more normative and healthy in Japan.
Japanese couples with this profile are less likely to be
dissatisfied with one another because they are less
focused on the marital dyad and more focused on the child
and family. Moreover, Japanese couples are less likely to
exhibit the kind of overt conflict that is associated with
these couples in the West; as a result, Japanese children
are less likely to experience the problems common among
children from high-conflict families.


The larger point is that principles of attachment and
family systems that are based on research in the West do
not necessarily apply in cultures with different values
and experiences. As noted above, behaviors that in the
West comprise a maladaptive pattern known as enmeshment,
are seen as more normative and more adaptive in Japan. The
Japanese phenomenon of ittaikan, which refers to extremely
close relationships characterized by an absence of
boundary between self and other, is seen as a sign of
maturity. The same phenomenon would be seen as a sign of
regression and would be considered pathological in the
West. Behaviors that are relatively rare and maladaptive
in one culture may be prevalent and accepted in another
culture, if those behaviors are serving very different
functions in the two contexts. Behaviors are embedded
within a larger network of relationships (extended family,
community, ancestors) and social institutions
(educational, religious, economic, political, etc.) that
support a particular experience of closeness.


?

[semitribe]

Sorry I can't answer your questions, but the article was really interesting! Coming from a Western point of view (as an American), while Japanese relationships on the whole appear to be more stable, in the end it just seems kind of depressing. It would be interesting to hear what form a Japanese marrage typically takes once all the children have moved out of the house.

This also gives some insight into the Japanese man's infamous reputation for extramarital affairs, and perhaps also the issue of Japanese men and "マザコン".

Out of curiosity, where'd you get the article? Is there a Japanese translation of it?

[PAULH]

here's the whole article

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0AZV/is_3_41/ai_93444767/pg_5

Enjoy.

[Nagoyaguy]

Hi Paul;

Interesting topic. I will try to answer your questions as best I can.

Here's a little background about me and my little family. I married my wife (Japanese) 12 years ago. We lived in Canada for 8 years after that, then returned to Japan 4 years ago. We have one child, a son, who is now 8 years old. He was born in Canada and spent the first 4 years of his life there before we came back to Japan. He's in Grade 3 now in a local elementary school- he loves it there, too. Fluent in both langauges, and if I have anything to say about it, he will stay that way.

As for my wife, she was an English major in college in Japan. When we went back to Canada, she attended college there as well and earned a degree in business administration. Worked a little as a tour guide as well. Now, in Japan, she is freelancing as a translator and interpreter. Probably her English is better than mine, although that's not difficult to do.

As to your questions;

1. found that the relationship has not turned out they thought it was and the images and perceptions of Japanese women/wives has changed re: roles within the relationship and as a husband

not at all. We didnt really have too many perceptions to begin with. I wanted to marry my wife, not a 'Japanese' wife. She wanted to marry me (I assume), not a foreign guy. We maintain a pretty similar life here to what we did in Canada.

2. Things have not changed all that much from before marriage?

Aside from the changes in age, location, and career, not really. In terms of our relationship, we still do many of the same things- cook together, weekend trips (without our son- he goes to the grandparents' house), walks at night, TV (she likes Chicago Hope and The Practice), etc.

3. Anybody found that the physical affection aspect diminishes after marriage and kids with a Japanese wife (I have certainly found that out for myself) What do the american women here say?

I think the physical relationship would change no matter the nationalities involved. Reality dictates that, when you have kids, you have less privacy. Therefore less chances for intimacy and physical contact. I know what you are driving at, though. I have friends in my situation (Japanese spouse) who complain that, once their kids are born, the sexual aspect of the relationship really dries up. I imagine that is a global phenomenon, though, not exclusive to Japan.

I find that physical affection begins to take on different forms after a decade or so of marriage. Back rubs, hand holding, gestures, even sitting together and enjoying a glass of wine on the sofa, all become more intimate and important than charging into the bedroom.

Interesting topic, though. I would love to hear what others think of it.

[guest of Japan]

Interesting article PaulH.

I've been married to a Japanese woman for a little over a year now, and we dated for several years before that. We have no children, and my wife works.

Nonetheless, I often feel as if my marriage is a business contract. It also seems that my wife wants the best of both worlds. She wants the cold stable rhythm of a Japanese marriage, but the expressed intimacy that characterizes a western marriage. I think we differ from the article in that I am the one who wants the absense of conflict.

I'm finding marriage to a Japanese woman requires a lot of work and patience. Cultural differences emerge from out of no where and sometimes we are unable to bridge them. I don't think I would want to have children in Japan. Life is challenging enough here as it is. The isolation of the father in Japan is little more than I think I could emotionally bear. That topped with incredible financial burden of children in this country is too much for me.

I have a pretty simple vison of being a father. Making enough money for the family is a piece of the role. The role also includes things like throwing a baseball in the park, teaching the child to ride a bike, painting the kitchen together, helping with homework, and talking about life's problems and possibilities. In Japan the father is assigned only the most tedious role. The little things that make you a father are a lot less possible to do.

[Nagoyaguy]

I find that it isnt necessary to "bridge" all cultural differences. Just accept them as much as possible. No culture has a monopoly on right and wrong.

As far as raising a child in Japan, I would say to go for it, with a couple of caveats.

First, do not for any reason live with your Japanese in-laws. If you do so, chances are your role as a father will more or less end. Any chance of your kids growing up bilingual will also be minimal, as their home life and school life will both be conducted in Japanese. As far as bilingualism, I am not a fan of the "one parent, one language" idea. I favour an "inside outside" approach. Inside my family (wife, son, me) we speak English only to each other. Usually watch English tv, videos, websites, etc. Most of life at home is in English. When the 3 of us go out anywhere together, we use English- parks, restaurants, that kind of thing. Outside my family (inlaws, school, friends) we use Japanese.

Second, don't try too hard to fit in to Japan. Face it, you're not Japanese, and never will be. Neither are your kids. Accept it and take advantage of it. My son tells everyone "I'm Canadian AND Japanese". My wife also uses this to advantage in certain situations. If there is some pressure to join neighborhood groups, PTA events, volunteer stuff, etc., she just says "my husband is Canadian and he won't let me do any of that stuff". Works every time.

IMHO, the kids who have the roughest time here are the returnees. Japanese kids who lived overseas for years and years, and now have come back to Japan. They look Japanese and are 100% Japanese by blood, so they are expected to conform. Mixed kids aren't.

[guest of Japan]

Thanks for your advice Nagoyaguy. Some of what you said had never even entered my mind.

[6810]

Indeed, married here too.

But when I cheered for Australia in the Olypic baseball, she scolded me:

Hey, you're half Japanese now! Dang!

[AgentMulderUK]

From my experience there is nothing particularly significant about your other half being Japanese or anything-else-ese.

The only problems stem from similar causes that must exist in any relationship. Its about learning about your partner, isn't it?

Even if your other half was from your own country, getting to know her is a very long learning curve and fraught with little misunderstandings and stuff like "We don't like that kind of thing in THIS family/town/etc"

I think people often attribute this 'hazy' understanding about their partner being due to the partner's different culture.

Just takes time.

I really don't buy this 'culture shock' and 'culture difference' at all.

Of course there are differences, but I don't think any of them are particularly vast or significant. It's all overated. Just look at the absolute nonense you read in guide books - this stuff is talking about Japanese culture dating back over 100 years ago....!!!


"Oh, we have to take our shoes off"
"Oh, we cannot always be as outspoken as we'd like to be"
"Public/private face"

So what?

All this stuff exists elsewhere, even if to a lesser extent.

There are probably as many (or more) 'cultural' differences between any pair of European countries.

Japan now, IMO is effectively just another Westernised country with a few historical flashbacks to remind themselves that they had a history. (festivals, temples,etc)

You go to the office, you have kids, you shop in a supermarket. you drink beer in a bar/izekaya/whatever.

So where's the culture shock mumbo jumbo?

I mean, we are not married to a women from Darkest Africa, or the Amazonian rainforest or Jupiter are we? Now THAT would be a challenge!!!

Just my rambling thoughts.....excuse my cynicism.

[guest of Japan]

When cultural differences emerge they are typically not easy to define and harder still to assign a rule or guideline to follow. I do not attribute every difference in my relationship to be based on culture, but some of them are. My wife is a smart, progressive thinking woman who has never lived abroad. I am just as much of an enigma to her at times, as she is to me.

[sanadamushi]

I guess I'll weigh in here. I unfortunately am coming to the end of a 5 year marriage with a Japanese woman. However, I think had she been any other nationality I would have encountered similar problems as I attribute a lot of our marriage problems to myself.

The article raised some interesting points, our marriage encountered the most difficulty when we moved to the U.S. for me to pursue graduate work. I was working 40 hours a week and taking a full course load and she felt resentful for having come here. Things got really bad and now 4 years later divorce is where we are. I am finishing up my master's this semester and the wife already has her's. I can relate to a lot of cultural issues the article brought up, lack of intimacy, focus on harmony, but also a strong sense of rebellion on the woman's part for not wanting to replicate the role her mother played.

I think marriage is something that I wasn't prepared for when I got married at age 25. I have done a lot of growing, but certainly through a lot of pain. I urge those of you considering marriage, and especially marriage with an asian woman to take a long term view and honestly assess some of the foreseeable and image the many unforeseeable difficulties and ask whether you are strong enough. Good luck to the rest of you, I know there are many good western/japanese marriages out there.

[Lynn]

Having a Japanese boyfriend was a lot better than having a Japanese husband. I am so not into the tanshinfunin thing. You know where the husband lives is a separate city working for at a remote branch his company has sent him to. I'd much rather move to the remote area and live with my husband. but I recently found out my guy is much more Japanese than I thought.

[BethMac]

Lynn, is your husband living in another city?

[PAULH]

I see Love child is back

[gt8595b]

Paul,
Thanks for the quick action.
I was just about to make a comment on that before I reloaded the page and saw yours.
You're a good mod.

-fraker