Foreced affection /rape? In Heian Japan

Can we talk about this? sengokudaimyo.com/Forced_Affection.html#Note1
From what I read from Genjimonagatari, a source from an user, and researched , it seems it was either the women were expected culturally to resist, as to not appear too "easy" (as we know that has always been seen as disreputable for women across many cultures) or were they actually trying their hardest to resist literal rape and obviously gave up after awhile(of course not too long because then that's a social faux pas and makes you look like a "bitch")?
Really trying to figure this out because obvious translation and context is always an issue. Plus, the latter would be kind fucked up lol. The former would just be kind of weird but usual double standard.

On a side note, why is their so much autism in Japanese social expections and norms? Like their is an exact expectation/ritual that must be followed to T for a lot of things or else you risk "losing face;" it's retarded imo, especially in this context.

Great times and culture. Now women have "rights" and the Japanese race is dying, huge percentage of adult males reaching 30+ years of age without having sex.

Did you even read my post or the source, you fag? I was asking a question.
I'm not sure if this was really "rape" as an expectation or just men having to basically convince the girl to fuck them and a girl having to "play hard to get" at first as usual. Then of course, finally give in as a social norm. That's what I'm trying to figure out. The less rapey view seems supported by the fact that there was supposedly a certain amount of time the girl had to "resist" or she would appear too "easy of a conquest" or too snooty.

The literally rape view seems supported by the fact that the men according to the writers, would feel slight "guilt" and some women would feel pretty distressed after a while. But the problem is, no one seems sure if this guilt was really there or just a formality and what it was really over? Guilt of kind of taking advantage of manipulating a innocent girl to get what he wants OR guilt of literally raping a a girl.

Bump for interest.

Why is the board so useless for any actual discussions or debates about historical occurrences outside war? Most of the other discussions are about things that are current or >&humanities
b.s. And NOT history related. Screw this board.

If its not about whites being nordecucks or blacks in Roman times then no one cares. Should have posted about communism, fascism, or Stirner if you wanted to partake in a discussion.

Hard to say, animals have some pretty fucking weird mating rituals, it's not a stretch to say humans haven't carried over some stuff. I have the inkling suspicion that it was more a formality thing. Playing hard to get's been a thing for centuries, so I suppose that could be part of it.
I think the guilt men were experiencing at the time potentially had to do with sullying something that was once pure. The idea of the transience of reality and experience is something common in Japanese literature (if I remember right) so it could work like this: let's say two nobles are in love, 'they can never have their first night together again', or something like that.

>This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages, etc. Threads should be about /specific topics/

>For the purpose of determining what is history, please do not start threads about events taking place less than 25 years ago. Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences. Discussion of modern politics, current events, popular culture, or other non-historical topics should be posted elsewhere. General discussions about international culture should go on /int/.
Fuck this this board. I hope /pol/ invades whatever else is left. You deserve your fates.

Japs have to turn everything in to a ritual though I swear, even drinking tea.
But yeah I was hoping it was that idea of courting, since they were known for exaggerating alot of things in the past including their feeling about relationships. Otherwise, Japanese men were pretty fucked up.
I'm less inclined to believe it was due to some feeling of longing for those moments again past the males' perspectives. Perhaps the distress the girls felt may have been due to being not used to their first time as a cultural expection? In many cultures it wasn't ideal for women to be wonton and enjoy sex too much now that I think about it, including Romans.
. That said, I'm sure there were a few cases where it might have actually been rape, particulaly when talking about the emperor. A girl would literally have no choice but to comply whether you're into him or not, because he's...the emperor.

Tbqh, I'm thinking of moving this thread to Veeky Forums because a lot of this seems to do with interpretation and translation as well.

Bumping it to the top of the board.

Nobody likes a slut

Nobody

When you're interested in the woman who could bear your children, you don't want her to grin like a slag and jam her tongue down your throat when you get somewhat intimate

That was only the sensibilities for that time period though. You have to admit it was a strange norm. Men were basically seen as the ones who initiate all sexual encounters and women must also act disinterested to a certain degree, if we are to interpret it that way.and women it seems were not supposed to act as if they enjoy sex, at least not at first. Them having their children seemed secondary since they were concubines most of the time.
Seems like a pointless display imo.
I feel you're alone in that sentiment in this culture and not all cultures was it exactly this was historically.

In Heian Japan?
My friend, watch a JAV or read some hentai and you'll find that this attitude towards female sexuality is still alive in Japanese popular culture.
It's actually rather disgusting imo.

The source I cited has an interesting perspective on the argument that I mentioned throughout the thread in in the OP. It's long but worth a read.
>Jap pop culture
Now that I think of it there are alot of rapey scenes in anime and shit. I think it's possible that both situations were a possiblity, especially when parents got involved with setting it up.

as opposed to overt western rape fantasies? this isnt a function of japanese culture exclusively


as far as this behavior goes, it's not all one way or all the other. there are lot of examples of women feigning disinterest or being coy while still pursuing romantic relationships through action - returning letters, reciprocating sexual or romantic gestures, etc. the article talks about the illusion of chastity, and maintaining that illusion is a joint effort; the woman takes certain steps to pretend she's pure, but the man helps to maintain the illusion by hiding the relationship, visiting her in secret, etc. the fact that they cooperate on this is evidence of the consensual nature of some of these relationships, and while it's not blunt, there's still communication taking place. all these autistic social expectations you're talking about make it easier to tell that the girl you want wants you back, and you can be confident that you're showing up at her house in the middle of the night for consensual sex rather than to rape her

the examples of actual rape from the article are mostly about the violation of these norms: tricking a woman into engaging in certain rituals, arriving when unexpected and refusing to leave, jeopardizing her public reputation, etc. if the men in question were actually interested in having consensual sex they'd stick to protocol, and the reaction of the women also makes it clear that kind of attention is unwelcome. women who are playing coy - even if they're playing it convincingly - don't violently sob their way through sexual encounters.

it's easy to find coercive elements in all of these interactions but i think it's fair to say some but definitely not all were consensual

You now realize that no one actually knows anything here, and it's basically an overglorified forum for discussing quirky Wikipedia articles.

Women naturally develop attachments to men they sleep with even if its forced. There's a reason Stockholm Syndrome is an overwhelmingly female condition. It makes perfect sense to resist as much as possible - if a man can be resisted, so can his children. If a man is capable of spreading his genes despite opposition, so will his children. On top of that, once a man has already had his way with you and possibly impregnated you it's too late to resist; it's better to try to get him to invest in you and any possible progeny. It's a biological imperative.

Literally every culture believed the man should approach the woman

There's a general consensus about biologists on this. Women who fought back against rapists were often killed. Women who learned to lay down and enjoy it survived to breed.

I'm interested I simply have zero knowledge of this subject

I guess you only read the first part of my sentence huh? Either that or your comprehension is poor. Must suck to have such bad reading comprehension skills past the age of 10, eh?
I disagree. this right here seems like an entirely cultural thing if it really was rape, and not purposely playing hard to get for the sake of convention. No other culture had something like this, especially not most Western ones.
Biologically, females want males who are the most capable and have the best genes. Thus, they will be very selective which may involve being coy or feiging disinterest until she can be sure he superior mate. That may be why many cultures developed this rule of men being the initiators and women being more restrained or passive.

The only way you can link this to other cultures is if we take the other view that most of the time it was them playing hard to get. It would be inline with other cultural views on how women shouldn't be the initiator, even to the point of being indifferent towards sex unlike men.

Did you at least try reading the link? It cites Genji and many other romance novels written in the period to make the author's point.

It happens in many cultures and even in animals.

Women have every biological reason to avoid being raped, or even avoid sex in general to a degree. There is every reason to be hard to get, because then only men capable of overcoming that will impregnate you, and you want your children to have genes capable of overcoming such difficulties.

But once women are already being raped and have no realistic chance of avoiding it they have no reason resist. They risk death if they resist. And once the deed is done it's likely they are pregnant and their biological motivation with regards to the rapist is now dramatically different. They have every reason to try to keep him around if at all possible.

Women form psychological attachments to men they have sex with whether they want to or not. Oxytocin (associated with bonding) production goes into overdrive anyway.

Looks like a Southeast Asian cosplaying as Japanese

Really? Her skin looks quite pale all over. Then again, SEA tend to be more attractive imo.

Those two possibilities aren't really mutually exclusive. Some Japanese women were probably sluts roleplaying to seem respectable while others really were chaste and didn't want to get fucked.

The difference isn't particularly important, since the two possibilities are indistinguishable from the perspective of an observer.

>Women form psychological attachments to men they have sex with whether they want to or not.
Now I'm going to need a source on that.
There are many other ways to convince a female you should have sex with you than rape though. That humans are infinitely resourceful helps with having multiple feats available.

Peacocks have very large, colorful, and healthy bodies to attract females. Men can have a large house, nice cars or horses and a strong healthy body displayed again, through multiple feats other than rape: muscle, complexion, facial symmetry, athleticism.
Rape seems like a desperate move, tbqh.

fair enough.
I guess I was interested in what was more commonplace.

You're thinking of rape in terms of a crime in a civilised society like ours. That's not really the human evolutionary context.

The classic historical / human evolutionary rape would be one human group attacking another, killing or chasing away the men, and claiming the women. Sure, the woman has reasons to resist the initial attack, but she has no business to resist once her group was beaten and she was taken.

The other type of rape, or at least what to modern sensibilities might be rape (I doubt many ancients would agree, and I know people today who wouldn't), would be instances when a woman wouldn't personally want to have sex with a particular man, but society compels her to do so, like with forced / arranged marriage, or (perhaps the most 'civilised' approach) the woman is socialised to willingly 'settle'.

>sex with a wife who loves you, is attracted to you, and is interested in/enjoys sex[with you] is a "degenerate" marriage.
I'm sorry but are you must have the lamest sex ever if you truly believe this. Your marriage(if you ever get married somehow) would be pretty boring and your wife will get fat and apathetic after 1 year( save even her first child).

>Japanese sexual tastes finally make sense

I wouldn't call "settling" a species of rape, that's a decision to sleep with the person even if you would rather choose someone else. Does not involve force either. Same with arranged marriage considering there were worse social consequences for not doing so and they were raised to see it as normal. "Love grows" after marriage type of mentality, not before.
In the end, they decide to just sleep with them.
That's why(and you may or may not be one of those guys that agrees) you can rape your spouse. Sex is a situational thing you know. I feel like men for millennia, have always seen it as a pair bonding thing. It may be more simple for animals but don't forget humans are sentient.

I considered the situation with war or over taking another tribe must have happened but doesn't mean it happened the majority of the time to affect the psych of most, let alone all, women in particular; So much so that they enjoy sex they clearly didn't want.

Your reading comprehension is shit, but I expect that from a 19 year old redditor. I'm talking about a woman you're courting.

What if she only does that because she is smitten with you? That's a stupid way to judge other people's character let alone past. I'm going to take it you have never been in a relationship though or had someone be attracted to you though.
Describe "somewhat intimate" btw, that's pretty vague as fuck. If you mean cuddling, what you said makes no sense. If you mean making out, what you said still makes no sense considering she is really just in to you.