Morgan posted:

For maybe a week after that there were ppl all over the media telling us this would be a huge fault, the end of the world, a religious disaster, yadda yadda whatsoever. When a week later the Bundesrat approved of the new law and our President signed it, there was hardly any media coverage. Now that the world apparently hasn't stopped turning it's like noone gives a shit about it anymore.

Unfortunately this is going to happen no matter what traditional value is being "devalued" because people who stick to traditional values tend to be the sort to not actually have anything resembling conscious thought on the matter. They were raised to view it as the correct way of going about things and never stopped to think about the why of it being done that way or why it is or isn't wrong to do it another way.

Well a thai mangaka once told me that shit like this usually doesn't gets covered in anime or manga because it would be too depressing or would take most of the plot, so ...

hurray for this manga and congrats to the mothers-to-be!

so this question is for those that may have more direct knowledge. has society and the laws in Japan changed enough that a noticeable number of lesbians and gays are now having children? i'm also curious how the children are entered into the family registry (which appears to be addressed in a later chapter)? finally, has any new LGBT legislation (other than city ordinances) percolated to the national level addressing marriage equality?

Japanese societal mores move about as fast as molasses in winter.

Not to mention, Abe himself hates the idea.

I get a generational last-gasp feeling around the current government, tbh. And I used to live in a part of Japan that probably supported LDP last election. (Though my part of that conservative prefecture actually voted Socialist, FWIW).

Here's hoping you're right. There are so many things I really, really dislike about the current Japanese government.

last edited at Jul 31, 2017 3:38PM

After having registered life partnerships since 2001 in my country (Germany) our government voted just a few weeks ago to make the civil marriage open for same sex couples as well. For maybe a week after that there were ppl all over the media telling us this would be a huge fault, the end of the world, a religious disaster, yadda yadda whatsoever. When a week later the Bundesrat approved of the new law and our President signed it, there was hardly any media coverage. Now that the world apparently hasn't stopped turning it's like noone gives a shit about it anymore.

That's more or less how it went here in Canada (well, except it happened longer ago and it was the Supreme Court--the actual government never had the guts). I think the thing is that all the fearmongering gives the impression that somehow it's going to have a huge impact on . . . something . . . but then when it happens, since it actually has zero impact on anyone except the people getting married, it's hard for the haters to really point to anything. I suspect there might even be an effect where the fundies prefer to think about something else so they don't have to notice how wrong they were.
(If anything, I suspect legalizing gay marriage actually strengthens the general status quo--all the gays stop being countercultural, stop questioning, and instead get hitched and move to the suburbs and have kids and join school committees and stuff)

Here's hoping you're right. There are so many things I really, really dislike about the current Japanese government.

My least favorite thing is that it's fundamentally unjust. The Democratic Party were as right as anyone about Fukushima, taking steps to fix it, and then the Touhouko quake and tsunami hit, while they were in office. The government even took correct steps. Nonetheless, somehow, that fall, the LDP were back in power. To my friends in Japan it felt like a second shock, tbh.

My only explanation is generational. The people who in their day were called the shinjinrui (new human beings) for being so anti-traditional, and their children, react like their elders did.

I think comics are more influential in Japan than outside Japan, and things like this and my lesbian experience with loneliness will change minds :)

The realism of this manga is always so soothing to read. These are real issues lesbian couples tackle and seeing them take the time to detail their struggles to get what many take for granted is fascinating.

That's more or less how it went here in Canada (well, except it happened longer ago and it was the Supreme Court--the actual government never had the guts).

Several provinces did have the guts though, so it was a thing in a large chunk of the country before the Supremes stepped in and said "okay, this applies to everyone now".

(If anything, I suspect legalizing gay marriage actually strengthens the general status quo--all the gays stop being countercultural, stop questioning, and instead get hitched and move to the suburbs and have kids and join school committees and stuff)

Well, not all the gays because y'know, there's more issues on the table than just marriage, despite its significance. Y'all don't get to say "welp, time to go home" because you got yours.

It is reasonable to ask whether the child of homosexuals will turn out homosexual as well, since we all know that straight parents only have heterosexual children.

Unfortunately this is going to happen no matter what traditional value is being "devalued" because people who stick to traditional values tend to be the sort to not actually have anything resembling conscious thought on the matter. They were raised to view it as the correct way of going about things and never stopped to think about the why of it being done that way or why it is or isn't wrong to do it another way.

I didn't follow the TV coverage, since I hardly ever watch TV (just crap running anyway), but I followed the print media. Most of the published letters from the readers where... well I'd go with "interesting". While I personally appreciate opening the marriage to same sex couples - especially since they now have the same rights as "traditional marriage partners", I have absolutely no problem with ppl not liking this. BUT: If they talk about it in public, they'd better have some GOOD arguments. But there was not a single argument I've read, that would have withstood any close examination at all. And I think that's the point: Ppl don't know what they are talking about, they are afraid of new things and like sticking to traditional things. In Germany we have a proverb: "Was der Bauer nicht kennt, frisst er nicht." I don't know if there is a similar proverb in English, but it roughly translates to "What the farmer doesn't know, he doesn't eat." Meaning someone is not open-minded towards new things and and prefers the one with which he is familiar. We had this discussion long enough in Germany. And since the world didn't stop turning since we had same sex partnership in 2001 I think it's time to force ppl to deal with the situation. Even if that means forcing them by law.

That's more or less how it went here in Canada (well, except it happened longer ago and it was the Supreme Court--the actual government never had the guts). I think the thing is that all the fearmongering gives the impression that somehow it's going to have a huge impact on . . . something . . . but then when it happens, since it actually has zero impact on anyone except the people getting married, it's hard for the haters to really point to anything. I suspect there might even be an effect where the fundies prefer to think about something else so they don't have to notice how wrong they were.

I don't know if it's the right way, but I think I prefer the way it happened over here:

We had life partnership for same sex couples since 2001 and people had time enough to get familiar with the whole concept. There were some political parties and non political organizations that wanted to open the civil marriage for same sex couples right from the beginning and where working towards it ever since. But after the CDU with chancellor Merkel was in administration since 2005 it never came up again. The CDU (conservative party) wanted to keep the status quo with the partnership but was actually forced by the Bundesverfassungsgericht (something like the supreme court) to give same sex couples more rights (like finances, taxes, and so on) since the Bundesverfassungsgericht made it clear that if same sex couples have the same duties, the also must get the same rights. But it was small steps over years, so no one of the people in Germany was actually forced to think about the whole situation. Like "Oh, they got some more rights? Yeah whatever. It's ok.". But a few weeks ago on a Monday Merkel went to a talk show and someone in the audience I think asked her about same sex marriage and she said she'd prefer for our members of Parliament to vote for their own and not for their party. It took all other parties in government about a day to set up a vote on Friday the same week.

I mean... they talked about it for 16 years and then just did it in a week. It was absolutely amazing and I think this was so damn quick, people didn't have enough time to think, let it get to them and form actually some kind of organized resistance. When they actually realized what was happening, the law was already signed by the President and put into effect starting in autumn. And now it just like "Yeah... what can I do... eh, I don't care." (Of course it helped, that about 73% of the German people was for the law in the first place ^^)

Morgan posted:

In Germany we have a proverb: "Was der Bauer nicht kennt, frisst er nicht." I don't know if there is a similar proverb in English, but it roughly translates to "What the farmer doesn't know, he doesn't eat." Meaning someone is not open-minded towards new things and and prefers the one with which he is familiar.

This is actually kinda funny cause my last name is Farmer and I'm almost always willing to try new foods, lol.

Nothing more frustrating than when an entertainment show tries to act like moral guardians by spewing bullshit questions. "Won't the kid get teased?" and it's like mother fucker y'all are the ones who set the tone of national opinion on a number of issues like these grow some fucking...I dunno, anything and just say that shit ain't right. Don't try to pawn off your latent homophobia on those other people, whoever the fuck they are. Some of whom probably watch your show. Fuck's sake.

Morgan: that would work best in Japan, too, IMO. The hugest opposition is like "What about The Family Register???" usually meaning the "federal registry" and it's actually pretty recent. I think there are lots of people in Japan who remember before it existed. But anyway, the objection is that actual marriage would somehow throw the register into chaos and civil unions wouldn't. They've had a very odd system of gay marriage (mostly used by women) since the early 1900s, whichever is older adopts the younger. Doesn't that put a different spin on these pseudo-incest stories?

That's more or less how it went here in Canada (well, except it happened longer ago and it was the Supreme Court--the actual government never had the guts).

Several provinces did have the guts though, so it was a thing in a large chunk of the country before the Supremes stepped in and said "okay, this applies to everyone now".

(If anything, I suspect legalizing gay marriage actually strengthens the general status quo--all the gays stop being countercultural, stop questioning, and instead get hitched and move to the suburbs and have kids and join school committees and stuff)

Well, not all the gays because y'know, there's more issues on the table than just marriage, despite its significance. Y'all don't get to say "welp, time to go home" because you got yours.

And yet many people do precisely that. It's not a good thing, but it happens. Happened with feminism too.
Well, it's not like gays stopped fighting for gay rights . . . but the focus has I think shifted, as has the question of allies. Back when there was a certain alliance between gay rights struggles and various others like racial struggles, and all the oppressed groups agreed that the cops were a thing to be feared and resisted. Now you get cop floats in the pride parade, and gay organizations give non-LGBTQ oppressed groups about the same lip service middle of the road "liberal" politicians do.

And yet many people do precisely that. It's not a good thing, but it happens. Happened with feminism too.
Well, it's not like gays stopped fighting for gay rights . . . but the focus has I think shifted, as has the question of allies. Back when there was a certain alliance between gay rights struggles and various others like racial struggles, and all the oppressed groups agreed that the cops were a thing to be feared and resisted. Now you get cop floats in the pride parade, and gay organizations give non-LGBTQ oppressed groups about the same lip service middle of the road "liberal" politicians do.

I think you mean non-GL. The GGGL community, as I call it sometimes, is only too willing to toss the rest of the acronym under whatever bus is coming along.

On the other hand, the issues of all these groups do not overlap.

Society has a lot of cursors, when you succeed to move one (like marriage), the others don't necessarily move. Some people don't feel like fighting for cursors that don't involve them directly.

I can understand that, because fighting is draining.

Morgan: that would work best in Japan, too, IMO. The hugest opposition is like "What about The Family Register???" usually meaning the "federal registry" and it's actually pretty recent. I think there are lots of people in Japan who remember before it existed. But anyway, the objection is that actual marriage would somehow throw the register into chaos and civil unions wouldn't. They've had a very odd system of gay marriage (mostly used by women) since the early 1900s, whichever is older adopts the younger. Doesn't that put a different spin on these pseudo-incest stories?

So the claim is that the big obstacle is they can't be arsed to tweak the software?

Well those are all interesting suggestions and ideas, but the REAL question is:

Are traps gay?

last edited at Aug 1, 2017 6:39PM

Probably stepping into a minefield by saying this but going to mention it anyway.

I'm a huge fan of yuri manga and parings and all that stuff, however when it comes to real life I'm actually quite a bit more conservative. From my point of view I have zero issue with lesbian relationships themselves (I take a non-interference point of view) but when it comes to the topic of having children or even adopting I personally get a bit squeamish. I even don't like single parents raising kids (but it's often unpreventable). People often talk about the logic of the problem of raising a kid as a single parent and the effects on the child (because of the lack of two different genders influence). I personally fail to see the difference when you have two parents of the same gender.

This manga has been illuminating though to see first person accounts like this. FYI, I'm in a country that has legalized gay marriage. I still find some issues with it though.

Probably stepping into a minefield by saying this but going to mention it anyway.

I'm a huge fan of yuri manga and parings and all that stuff, however when it comes to real life I'm actually quite a bit more conservative. From my point of view I have zero issue with lesbian relationships themselves (I take a non-interference point of view) but when it comes to the topic of having children or even adopting I personally get a bit squeamish. I even don't like single parents raising kids (but it's often unpreventable). People often talk about the logic of the problem of raising a kid as a single parent and the effects on the child (because of the lack of two different genders influence). I personally fail to see the difference when you have two parents of the same gender.

This manga has been illuminating though to see first person accounts like this. FYI, I'm in a country that has legalized gay marriage. I still find some issues with it though.

That actually was an argument in Germany, too: "What about the Children?" Don't they need mother AND father?

Well the point is: DO they? Does a child need two parents of different sexes? Or does it need loving parents that raise there child to be a proper adult? Some ppl in Germany had the former opinion and talked about it in public. Ignoring that a "family" with two parents of different sexes does not automatically mean that they are both loving and caring parents who can and should raise a child. On the other hand regarding adoption laws in Germany: The youth welfare office had a practice of giving children to same sex couples who had a civil union for fostering the children. This was ok by law since the welfare office did argument, that same sex parents are just a good for raising children then "different sex parents". But they had no right to adopt children together - which seems a bit hypocritical.

Morgan: that would work best in Japan, too, IMO. The hugest opposition is like "What about The Family Register???" usually meaning the "federal registry" and it's actually pretty recent. I think there are lots of people in Japan who remember before it existed. But anyway, the objection is that actual marriage would somehow throw the register into chaos and civil unions wouldn't. They've had a very odd system of gay marriage (mostly used by women) since the early 1900s, whichever is older adopts the younger. Doesn't that put a different spin on these pseudo-incest stories?

In this context I'm following the changes in the royal family (RF) with interest. They've got the problem that the RF is rather small and from generation to generation they're in a tighter spot to find a successor. The Emperor currently has 4 successors: his two sons, his grandson and his brother who has no children of his own. When Akihito will step down in a while - and regarding the age of his brother, there will be only 2 real successors and currently non of them are from the direct line of the Crown prince, since Naruhito only has a daughter.

While this is not about same sex couples, the problem here lies in the constitution and the family register. The constitution does not allow for daughters to success the throne at the moment. The family register in its current form works afaik in a way that a daughter marrying leaves her own family to join the one of her husband. With the constitution limiting the RF to the core family and excluding family members "leaving" the family (daughters marrying) it is rather obvious that the RF will get smaller and finding a successor will be more and more of a problem. While this may not be a problem for the succession of Emperor Akihito, the discussion will be held and changes have to be made to prevent the RF from dying out. I presume those changes will not only be made to the royal family but nation wide. While it may not have an immediate impact on same sex marriage it will however have a great impact on the practise of family registers.

last edited at Aug 2, 2017 8:02AM

Most actual research I've heard of on the matter generally agrees that two parents is a good thing (not to slam single parent families), but them having different genders is largely irrelevant. What matters is having supportive parents, who can devote time and attention to the child. Which seems to be something the couple in question has definitely covered.

Morgan

Regarding the Imperial Family, there are a couple alternative solutions you are not taking into account. Keep in mind this is the oldest reigning dynasty in history, since the time of Emperor Jinmu (accession to imperial rank in 660 BCE), the same family has occupied the Chrysanthemum Throne. They got rather good at avoiding extinction.
Before the modern times, the male primogeniture was not a law, merely a custom, that was put aside on numerous instances. Several branches of the family were passing the throne back-and-forth between them, and Japan even had eight reigning empresses.
Now, the current, small-ish Imperial Family is the result of the 1947 laws, that: 1) removed numerous collateral branches (a previously viable pool of successors); 2) restricted the succession to male primogeniture (though, this was the same in 1889 version); and 3) made it impossible for an out-of-wedlock child to inherit the throne (before 1947, a son born to a concubine could inherit, in fact, the Taisho Emperor was one such example, being the son of the Meiji Emperor and his concubine, Sawarabi no Tsubone).
Note that a change to any of these clauses could result in solving the problem of succession, without any repercussions for wider public. Bringing back the collateral branches, no problem, it is just an extended Imperial Family. Changing the male primogeniture, also not a problem, the question of inheriting the Chrysanthemum Throne would hardly make an impact on such things as inheritance customs for private citizens. Or just bringing back the option to adopt (children born to concubines, like the Taisho Emperor, would be legally adopted, amusingly, by the wife of the Emperor).

Also, the family register, as far as I am aware of, does not actually require the wife to be the one to leave her old family, and join her husband's. It is merely a traditional custom, the law only specifies that both spouses have to have only one family name, and both are then counted under said family.
And as far as traditions go, it is not unheard of, even for Japan, for a family of the wife to adopt her husband, in order to continue the family name in lack of male successors of the blood. This is actually not that uncommon for the upper-class families.

In short, while I am absolutely certain that the Imperial Family will survive, and that the Japanese would be perfectly willing to alter a few laws to make it happen, should all else fail, I doubt any of that will have an impact on things such as same-sex marriages.

last edited at Aug 2, 2017 12:56PM

As stated above, it's not that rare that a husband takes the family name of the wife, because they don't want the name to be lost.

I have an acquaintance, French, who married a Japanese and he took her name. As far as Japan is concerned, he's now part of HER family and on her family register. He's now part of the Miyazaki family (That one http://www.miyazaki.org) and so their kids will have her name.

But as for the Imperial Family, I don't know if the traditionalists would accept it.

Morgan

Regarding the Imperial Family, there are a couple alternative solutions you are not taking into account. (...)
Before the modern times, the male primogeniture was not a law, merely a custom, that was put aside on numerous instances. Several branches of the family were passing the throne back-and-forth between them, and Japan even had eight reigning empresses.

Now, the current, small-ish Imperial Family is the result of the 1947 laws, that: 1) removed numerous collateral branches (a previously viable pool of successors); 2) restricted the succession to male primogeniture (though, this was the same in 1889 version); and 3) made it impossible for an out-of-wedlock child to inherit the throne (before 1947, a son born to a concubine could inherit, in fact, the Taisho Emperor was one such example, being the son of the Meiji Emperor and his concubine, Sawarabi no Tsubone).
Note that a change to any of these clauses could result in solving the problem of succession, without any repercussions for wider public. Bringing back the collateral branches, no problem, it is just an extended Imperial Family. Changing the male primogeniture, also not a problem, the question of inheriting the Chrysanthemum Throne would hardly make an impact on such things as inheritance customs for private citizens. Or just bringing back the option to adopt (children born to concubines, like the Taisho Emperor, would be legally adopted, amusingly, by the wife of the Emperor).

That is more or less exactly the same thing I said before (without the historical detail which I could have mentioned but didn't to somewhat shorten the post).

While point 1) and 2) do require changes to the constitution/law and the administration of the family register as I mentioned before, I don't think point 3) you stated is any option at all. There is no concubinage in Japan - at least non that I know of - and in modern times I think the Emperor having a concubine would be more of a public scandal then a valid option towards increasing the Imperial Family. Furthermore the Emperor or the Crown prince would have to agree to having a concubine beside their wife. Again I don't think they would necessarily agree to this.

Also, the family register, as far as I am aware of, does not actually require the wife to be the one to leave her old family, and join her husband's. It is merely a traditional custom, the law only specifies that both spouses have to have only one family name, and both are then counted under said family.
And as far as traditions go, it is not unheard of, even for Japan, for a family of the wife to adopt her husband, in order to continue the family name in lack of male successors of the blood. This is actually not that uncommon for the upper-class families.

I actually don't know if it's law or just tradition. In the Imperial Family however EVERY Princess married before 1947 was reduced to a commoner and nowadays imperial princesses also leave the family after marrying a commoner. However I don't know if that's because of family registration (law) or because they marry a commoner. But since they have to marry a commoner anyway because of the 1947 law that removed nearly all branches from the imperial family there is no real alternative beside staying single and remaining in the imperial family.

In short, while I am absolutely certain that the Imperial Family will survive, and that the Japanese would be perfectly willing to alter a few laws to make it happen, should all else fail, I doubt any of that will have an impact on things such as same-sex marriages.

No it doesn't. At least not directly. But that's what I've said above. I personally do believe that some changes in the near future have to be made to both the constitution and the administration of the family register to secure the imperial family for the future. And I do believe that once they've started changing this rather stiff system, and the Japanese people are aware of the changes that COULD be made, more changes will be demanded by the people. BUT this also requires some hard work to make people understand the situation of the gay community in their own country. I think this will be a long and hard process, but even Japan will change in the end.

Points 1 and 2 do not require the change of the family register laws, under those, it is perfectly legal for the husband to take the family name of his wife. It is just uncommon.

The restrictions placed on the royals are entirely the result of the Imperial Household Law of 1947. The changing of said laws would not affect the general public, since those laws are specific, passed to govern one specific thing, which is the Monarchy of Japan. Thus, any change to them would only pertain to the inheritance of said Monarchy, and nothing else.

As for point 3, that is why I phrased it as "bringing back adoption". Legally speaking, children of concubines were illegal. What made Taisho a viable crown-prince was the fact the Empress adopted him after he was born. Keep in mind we are talking about the father of the Showa Emperor, so this is not ancient history. Showa Emperor himself was urged by his court to take a concubine after his wife failed to produce a male heir, but he declined, and afterwards the Empress gave birth to two sons. Concubines were never a legal institution, they were just imperial mistresses, usually with ceremonial titles conferred to them at court. Hence why their children were adopted by the Emperor's wife. Mind you, do not misunderstand, I am not actually advocating this, merely pointing out that such a thing would be possible if the Imperial Family is allowed to adopt a potential heir. The question is how the public would view this. On the one hand, these are the modern times, as you said, on the other, this is Japan, which has a remarkable tendency to not evolve its mentality, and the practice of imperial mistresses was abandoned literally by the previous Emperor, Showa, whose own father and predecessor, was a child of one such mistress. I literally have no idea how such a thing would be viewed, but if there is any place on Earth where it would not surprise me too much, it is Japan.

So, on the one hand, amendments to the 1947 laws in these terms would actually bring back some of the more traditionalist elements, rather than something that could be viewed as more modern, and would, probably, appeal more to the traditionalists, many of whom as of late seek to revise much of the Constitution (informally called the MacArthur Constitution, since it was basically drafted by the Allies, you can see why more traditional elements would like to see it, and the 1947 inheritance laws, changed).
And since the laws of the inheritance of the throne are so specific, effectively governing just one thing, unconnected with every-day legal problems of ordinary citizens, I doubt their impact, however indirect, would be something worth considering.

This could lead to a whole off-topic snowstorm, so I will stop now...

last edited at Aug 2, 2017 2:28PM