Jump to content

Talk:Homosexuality in Japan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 6 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Femachisma.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Esmith71.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kojiki reference

[edit]

Well, the Kojiki wasn't written in early 7th century, but in the year 712, which is early 8th century, right? -Unsigned

Yes, Kojiki was compiled and published in 712. Hadrianvs et antinovs (talk) 00:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Hadrianvs[reply]

Accuracy?

[edit]

Does anyone else think the content of this page is BS?--66.53.98.122 23:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm indeed from a very old samurai family, and have come across this article while looking into what the English sphere of the internet says about my kind of people. I can say that most if not all of this page is utter nonsense. It is true that homosexuality has always been legal in Japan to this very day and none has ever been punished for being homosexual. However, it is ridiculous to suggest that a significant portion of the population was practising it. This article totally lacks an explanation of, for example, why Kagema Jaya（陰間茶屋） were mostly located in fairly dodgy places around Edo, such as Mukou Jima （向島） --TokyoJapan (talk) 14:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's highly exaggerated. This page makes it seem like everyone in Japan participated in this practice, when in reality a very small percentage of the population did...peasants, for the most part, did not, and they comprised 80% of the Japanese population. Also, not every samurai, shogun, or emperor participated...again, there is a great amount of exagerration on here making it seem very POV. There's no way I'm going to try to edit it, though, because my edits would be deleted in a second -- User:Squeemu —Preceding comment was added at 23:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No.In Japan even poor peasants did "nanshoku" practice in the feudal era. Of course not "all of samurai, shogun, and emperors" did participated shudo. There were some strange people in everywhere.Hadrianvs et antinovs (talk) 04:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)hadrianvs et antinovs[reply]

Please find me some good (real) sources that show that "nanshoku" took place amongst a good amount of the peasants. Perhaps it happened in some isolated cases, but during my fairly extensive study on this subject, I have found only information that either doesn't mention the peasants at all or that states that they did NOT participate in "nanshoku". Also, enough samurai, shogun, and emperors did not participate to warrant not calling them strange people. Squeemu (talk) 05:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is to be expected from Americans to immediately take every notion of homosexuality elsewhere and turn it into a mainstream thing when, in fact, few societies were ever strictly homosexual. I think the Japanese stance is more like "Don't care what you do in you bedroom" and is a lot more tolerant of other things as well (such as pedophilia even) and while there are no laws against is, homosexuality is not as glorified as it is in USA. If I remember, there was a notion of a writer speaking against shudo but that sentence, to be expected, was quickly erased. I guess Wikipedia has to be censored for American users. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.139.1.4 (talk) 21:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want some accurate sources try the bibliography of G.P.Leupp book Male Colors pages 279-302; it is widely exaustive, citing both Japanese and Western sources, although it spends few time upon pre-Tokugawa homosexual relations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.163.29.148 (talk) 08:23, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Buddhist view

[edit]

I's like to challenge a view expressed on this page. It says that there is no prohibition against male-male sex in Buddhism, specifically referring to monks. But this is not true. The vinaya, or monastic discipline, does prohibit all forms of sexual activity, including sex with men, women, self, animals, and inannimate objects. Buddhist monks are to refrain from any sexual activity whatso ever. Indeed the Dalai Lama has famously come out against the practice of male-male sex, although I think in his case he was over stepping the bounds by applying monastic rules to everyone. Be that as it may I think your section on Kukai needs rewriting, although I agree that the practice *is* associated with him. Kukai was insistent on maintaining the monastic rules of the Vinaya, which Professor Abe brings out in his book The Weaving of Mantra, and this was an important factor in his gaining the acceptance of the Nara Buddhist establishment. He is contrasted with Saicho the founder of Tendai who did suggest dropping the vinaya, and was universally deplored for even suggesting it! So what you are suggesting runs counter to what we know about Kukai. mahābāla 15:07, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC) (sorry I didn't sign this first time)

here are some quotes from Leupp:
"One of the most striking features about premodern Japanese homosexuality is the degree to which it was associated with the Buddhist religious establishment" (27-28)
He also says the link with Kukai is legend. In addition, he discusses some of the proscriptions against homosexuality in Buddhist literature (eg: the Ojoyoshu (985), but says (and I'm paraphrasing here) that they were largely disregarded in Japan, where there were no prohibitions emerging from Shinto or from Japanese interpretations of Confucianism.
Feel free to change whatever you think is wrong. Exploding Boy 12:46, Feb 5, 2004 (UTC)
I heard that the difference between Christianity and Buddhism, was that Buddhism didn't have the same concept of "Sin". That means, Sex is a human mistake, but it is up to the individual if s/he wants to live a life with the mistake, or detach him/herself from it.

Thanks. It seems that the Japanese were apt to become lax about monastic discipline because the history of Japanese Buddhism is replete with reformers who castigated their contemporaries! mahābāla 15:07, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It's all just urban legend. It was true that there were many monks getting too desperate and going on top of the others. However, that was "officially" illegal in every Buddhist tradition in Japan (不邪淫戒）. I mean, any sexual act by monks was quite lowly regarded. As a Theravada monk I know once put it, "People believe what they want to believe." --TokyoJapan (talk) 14:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What's an urban legend? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.161.200 (talk) 23:54, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Homosexuality in modern Japan

[edit]

Why does the "Homosexuality in modern Japan" section concern itself solely with anime? What about actual people? How do they fit in? -Branddobbe 06:04, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)

Probably because no one has had the chance to write anything yet. I don't think it's a purposeful exclusion. Exploding Boy 16:35, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
"Some manga are directly aimed at the gay market, and these can sometimes show the depiction of erect penises, oral, and anal sex, masturbation, rape, bondage, and sadomasochism." I might be wrong, but I think girls' manga also often includes depiction of these images. -Unsigned
I assure you, it does. Orinthe
About six months have passed and nothing has been written on it. Will someone volunteer soon? Mike H 10:01, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Well there are few if not any homosexuals in modern Japan. Sounds stupid but let me explain. In Japan homosexuality is not a label of self identity as it is in the west, in Japan homosexuality is something you do. So very few people in Japan actually consider themselves "homosexual", they just perform homosexual acts. This is not to be discussed in public as social etticat is extremely important. If someone found out you were committing homosexual acts they would not consider you "gay", and they would not be disgusted at you for being homosexual. They would be disgusted for you committing the act. For this reason Japanese people do not relate or consider themselves homosexual, because in the culture they are not homosexual, only doing homosexual things, and you would never tell people that you do those things because it makes no sense to. I do agree that they should have a better section on this and probably explain this. 

-sources- Japanese in Japan

````

In other words, as long as you hide your true self from the world, you're fine, but if you admit to your lifestyle, you're judge and discriminated against. How is this different at all from the USA or anywhere else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.0.141 (talk) 13:15, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edit in "Military same-sex love"

[edit]

I changed "...where it was customary for a young samurai to apprentice to an older and more experienced man, whose lover he would then become for a number of years." to "...where it was customary for a young samurai to apprentice to an older and more experienced man. The young smaurai would be his lover for many years." because the former sounded awkward. I know it's not ideal, but I figured that I should change it a bit. If anyone has a more fluid way to structure this feel free to change it. angrysquirrel July 6, 2005 02:09 (UTC)

Modern

[edit]

I've added a popular media section for present situation. It needs A LOT of work. Also, a commentary of life in Japan, something about society is geared for straight married couples, makes it difficult for even straight singles, straight un-married couples, let alone les and gay to live. Lack of open discrimination, but undercurrents... etc etc. post added by User:DDD DDD

Please sign your posts using four tildes (~), like this: ~~~~. Thanks. Exploding Boy 07:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
EP. sorry about that. still kinda new here. forget often. DDD DDD 07:23, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation

[edit]

Howdy, I just merged some from the German version. Unfortunately, the Germans do tend to assume that people are only interested in reading foreign information in a German context (which pisses off the Wikipedians from Austria to no extent, but I suppose this tangent is gettin a bit long...) Anyway, one of the statements in the German page was that civil unions performed in Germany were not legally valid in Japan. Is it safe to assume that same-sex marriage, civil unions, and domestic partnerships from ANY other country are not recognised, or should I just leave it as stands. samwaltz 20:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe so. There is nothing at a nation-wide level. However, some local governments may have passed a resolution to recognize a same-sex marriage and offer some services reserved for "other" marriage. Non-legally, I believe most Japanese will recognize an officially recognized same-sex marriage as having a legal meaning and consider it a marriage. So, the couple will be referred as "Married couple of (surname)". --Revth 07:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is all this true?

[edit]

Was homosexuality commonplace in Japan? I find it hard to beleive. There are similar articles on Greece, Rome, and China. I find it hard to believe that these great civilizations would practice pederasty and have homosexuality commonplace.66.53.109.54 21:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Do you also find it hard to believe that there are homosexual animals, such as the Bonobo (Errr... tweaked spelling)? Or that some Native American tribes revered homosexuality? How about the Egyptians? I've seen photos of dynastic Egyptian works with homosexual motifs. For that matter, do you find it hard to believe that people spell "believe" with an i-e?~~
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I find it hard to believe that homosexuality was once a majority. It will always be a minority. If you were born heterosexual in ancient times, why would you pursue a same sex relationship? It is the same today. If you are born homosexual, are you going to adopt a heterosexual life just to fit in? No, because you were not born that way. It is the same in ancient times. If the entire society, hypothetically, embraced same sex relationships, but if you were born heterosexual, you are not going to find a same sex lover just to fit in.66.53.109.54 23:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think a big part of people in the World, both those who engage in heterosexual and homosexual relations are in fact bi. Simply they will never admit it, both of them. Most homosexual men are in fact bisexual with a strong preference for male who, due to their sentimental and sexual satisfation in this kind of intercourse do not feel the necessity to have sex with women. This could have been the same in Japan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.163.29.148 (talk) 08:47, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In most societies people are not terrified of same-sex affections and thus freely recognize - and are drawn to - beauty in others of the same sex, more or less as often as to the other sex. Today peaches, tomorrow strawberries. That is the rule, and out present situation is the exception. Haiduc 23:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Errr... I misread. Sorry. No, I don't think there were any claims about it being the majority orientation/identification per se. However, part of the article discusses how the Japanese historically had not identified their selves with their sexual action, any more than the average meat-eating human considers herself to be a carnivore. Thus, the occasional foray into other types of sex acts does not make one gay or straight any more than the occasional salad makes me a vegetarian. Similarly, people who experience certain same-sex environments, such as prison or military service, may engage in same-sex sexual acts without considering themselves gay. (Yet another type of act which is observable among animals. samwaltz 02:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Samwaltz has got it right according to the historical analyses I have read. The way these things were viewed was totally different back then. There is a book out called Homosexuality and Civilization by Louis Crompton, you might be interested. --Bluejay Young (talk) 21:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not considered cheating?

[edit]

I recently heard that if a married man has sex with another man in Japan it traditionally is not considered cheating. I'm not sure if this is true so I wanted to make sure before posting. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheRealdeal (talk • contribs) 18:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Oh, many closeted bisexual men delude themselves into thinking that in Europe as well! Rsynnott 10:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And in the USA. Aristophanes68 (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Slang

[edit]

Is there any way to find a source for these slang terms? Also, I am very shocked to see "Dondake" not listed. It's very popular right now in Japanese mainstream media. They're even selling keychains now that say "Dondake!" when you press a button. --Do Not Talk About Feitclub (contributions) 13:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the slang terms are in Manga! Manga! by Freidrich (sp?) Schott. I can look them up and get the references in later. --Bluejay Young (talk) 21:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heian Diaries

[edit]

A friend just pointed out something to me on line that led me to this page, where it says that there are some Heian diaries that discuss homosexual relationships. I have heard this before, but I don't have the titles. I'd like a source on that, mostly because I want to know which diaries they are in. --Bluejay Young (talk) 21:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are many diaries that contain male love affairs. e.g. 『台記』、『春記』、『小右記』、等々。etc.Hadrianvs et antinovs (talk) 00:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)hadrianvs[reply]
Thank you! Is there any way you could translate that? --Bluejay Young (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gei-comi

[edit]

Would someone post some examples of titles of gei-comi in this or a related thread? It may be a much more obscure genre, but I've found no examples of it beyond this Wiki mention. AtenRa (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I already redirected the term here... it's been nearly a year and noone's fixed it though, so maybe a redirect will attract some attention for sourcing? Tyciol (talk) 03:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Parenthesis

[edit]
"(This frequently creates confusion, as, in Japan, the term shōjo-ai does not mean lesbian content; rather, it is used to describe stories with explicit sex between adult men and underaged girls.)

From the anime/manga section of this article. I'm not yet an expert on this subculture, but I've never heard the term shojo-ai used in reference to this. I am only familiar with lolicon being used in reference to this particular subject matter. If this were indeed a synonym, I would think it would be at least mentioned there. Instead, shōjo-ai redirects to the article on Yuri. That article does mention this idea as well:

"In Japan the term shōjo-ai (少女愛, shōjo-ai? lit. girl love) is not used with this meaning,[6] and instead tends to denote pedophilia, with an equivalent meaning to the English term "girllove".[17] Still, the western use of yuri has broadened in the 2000s, picking up connotations from the Japanese use.[15] American publishing companies such as ALC Publishing and Seven Seas Entertainment have also adopted the Japanese usage of the term to classify their yuri manga publications.[18][19]"

I see a serious problem here though, in only making mention of this in the homosexuality and yuri articles, because it covers a topic broader than a subset of homosexual artistry. It seems sort of 'snuck in' there, and I think whoever has added this should have worked it into other articles that would also pertain to it. I don't know how long it has been there, perhaps it's been around prior to creation of related articles. I'll fact tag that mention like I have this one so we can get some proper sources credited for this alternate slang use. Tyciol (talk) 03:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did some editing on the yuri article and I think your concern has been addressed. But in any case, let's discuss about it there. Kazu-kun (talk) 09:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i like how japanese homosexuality conveniently comes from china. its interesting how all the good things, japan likes to say is native to japan, but when it comes to "bad" things, then it came from china. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.120.169 (talk) 18:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why LGBT?

[edit]

Why is this article called "LGBT in Japan" instead of "Homosexuality in Japan"? A reader not specifically familiar with the English language or United States culture would not necessarily immediately know what "LGBT" stood for, and the article isn't really even about "LGBT" because it's almost entirely about homosexuality, and not "transgender" (and bisexuality is just a subset of homosexuality anyway). This is just totally unnecessary political correctness for the sake of political correctness, but at the cost of the accuracy and readability (especially for non-native English speakers or those not from US/Canada). It might make sense to rename articles about homosexuality in North America this way, especially ones specifically dealing with things like the gay rights movement, but to name international or historical articles this way just seems silly. 71.42.2.154 (talk) 15:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I very much second this concern! LGBT includes the term "gay", which refers to a particular homosexual subculture that emerged predominantly in the US in mid-20th century (and later exerted broad influences upon the rest of the world). This term has nothing to do with pre-20th-century Japan that is featured very prominently this article. I would strongly insist on renaming this article to "Homosexuality in Japan", or to another culturally-neutral title. InMemoriamLuangPu (talk) 05:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree, and I've never even understood why they say "LGBT"??? if transsexuality is not a sexual orientation and has nothing to do with homosexuality, and this LGBT term confuses people and makes them think gays are transvestites, and why LG? why "lesbian and gay"? its just HOMOSEXUAL or gay, and does it really offense bisexuals if you dont add a B? Totally ridiculous and unnecesary long politically-correct term. sorry for my english :) --186.59.143.43 (talk) 00:03, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of debating about the acronym itself (does T belong?, etc.), focus on whether this title would be more appropriate to the article if more information on bisexuals and transgendered people were discussed. The reason the page was moved to LGBT in the first place was to make it parallel with numerous other LGBT topics in Country X pages. Is it conceivable that an expansion of this page to include more B and T topics would make the "homosexuality and..." title not inclusive enough? Aristophanes68 (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anime and manga - verifiable?

[edit]

This section badly needs citations. It has none, and reads as vague and overgeneralizing. 67.142.173.20 (talk) 01:57, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

/* Monastic same-sex love */ name change?

[edit]

The material from the old LGBT Topics and Shinto article has been merged into this section, and I wonder if we need to change the name of the section from Monastic same-sex love to the broader Homosexual behavior and Japanese religious traditions. Looking over the section, I'm not sure the discussion of Shinto fits into a section on monasticism. Or maybe we need to separate sections--one on religion in general and one focusing on monasteries? Aristophanes68 (talk) 16:35, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

merge tag

[edit]

Someone merge-tagged sexual minorities into this article, without discussion. I am starting the discussion. Support merge.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 10:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, on the grounds that the combined article would be rather long and floppy. I'd support reorganizing to make two articles, one on historical conditions and one on modern Japan; that would cut down on redundancy by keeping related material together. Splitting the topics would not significantly impair either article, as the traditional Japanese conceptions of homosexuality have little-to-no relevancy to modern Japanese society. - JRBrown (talk) 02:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I'm not sure if this is major enough to warrant a discussion, but I'm putting it here to play it safe. The link to the Japanese Wikipedia takes you to a page that has very little to do with the articles in the other languages; would it be a good idea to link it to the page ja:同性愛 (homosexuality) instead, since it has a section on homosexuality in Japan? Nemui10pm (talk) 11:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of "yaoi" in LBGT in Japan template

[edit]

Please see discussion at Template talk:LGBT in Japan. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:44, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Napoleonic Code?

[edit]

http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/napoleonic_code.html seems to disagree with "in accordance with the Napoleonic Code", and at a glance seems more legit than http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=4126. This isn't my area at all, but I wanted to point out and let you fine gentlecolts make out the heads and the tails of it. I've also added a citation needed to the page next to the offending line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.212.219.164 (talk) 09:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other

[edit]

In the Other section of links, The webpage with URL http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/biborien.htm has moved to the new address http://rictornorton.co.uk/bibliog/biborien.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rictornorton (talk • contribs) 08:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC) Sorry I forgot to sign this Rictornorton (talk) 08:57, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed two "issues"

[edit]

I recently removed an issue, which I think is resolved, and whoever put that issue up was misguided.Khoor, iljxuh rxw pb qdph xvlqj Fdhvdu Flskhu (Fdoo ph) 03:34, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Homosexuality in Japan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Male couple on a futon

[edit]

The caption originally read "A man reclines with one wakashū and converses with another." It was later changed to "A man reclines with one wakashū and converses with another while a female onlooker stares." There are clearly only three figures, so the second caption can't be entirely accurate, but I don't know whether the standing person is meant to be male or female. I'm inclined to guess female, since their hair is distinctly different from the wakashu's, but I'm uncertain. I've changed it to not specify, since clearly one editor guessed one way and another guessed the other way, but could anyone clarify?2603:3005:1D00:6000:7D04:118:948A:671C (talk) 23:19, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is "Nekama"?

[edit]

"Nekama" redirects here but the word doesn't appear on the page. I can't figure out how to search old revisions to find it, either. What happened? 2001:4898:80E8:7:0:0:0:500 (talk) 21:25, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Homosexuality in Japan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

a more hostile...

[edit]
moving towards a more hostile stance known as nanshoku

a more hostile attitude toward nanshoku, and the attitude was called, wait for it, nanshoku? Confusing. Schissel | Sound the Note! 21:33, 7 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should this really be about homosexuality?

[edit]

I feel like this needs a major re edit. A majority of the pre meiji material is describing pedophilia not homosexuality. Almost all the described material references young/non adult boys. Can someone please look at this? RemoveMYIPplease (talk) 12:10, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rather hebephilia or ephebophilia than pedophilia. There's also mention of women getting together with those boys, though, and the attempts of detaching the practice from age. Nakonana (talk) 17:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How do I delete this comment I did not know my IP would be visible and would like to not have it visible. RemoveMYIPplease (talk) 19:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RemoveMYIPplease: See your talk page. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 22:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Title? - Male Homosexuality

[edit]

I find the title rather problematic as this article is mainly about male homosexuality. 2A02:908:E844:5460:BEEB:673B:58EC:2A5B (talk) 07:32, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Homosexuality_in_Japan&oldid=1207633054"