“White Marriage,” Japanese-Style
Book Review: Pacher A. (2022) (No) Sex in Japan: The Sociology of Asexuality in Intimate Relationships, Cham: Springer. 209 pp
Abstract
A consciously unconsummated union in which spouses forgo sexual relations has historically been referred to as a “white marriage.” This review of Alice Pacher’s (No) Sex in Japan: The Sociology of Asexuality in Intimate Relationships (2022) explores the phenomenon of marital asexuality, challenging prevailing Western assumptions about the intrinsic link between marriage and sexuality. Through a comparative sociological analysis of narratives from Japanese and German couples regarding their sexual relationships, the book argues that intimacy is not a universal feature of marriage but rather a socio-cultural construct, where sexual activity between spouses is shaped by broader socio-economic and cultural forces. The review underscores how economic instability, work-related fatigue, evolving family structures, poor sexual health, the parent-centered nature of the Japanese family, and the prominence of the commercial sex industry collectively contribute to diminished libido and the decline of intimate relations within marriage. Japanese respondents tend to associate sex more with reproductive obligation than with emotional intimacy, with their erotic desires often redirected toward extramarital affairs and commercial sex. According to Pacher, German respondents perceive Japanese attitudes toward sexual behavior with rejection and suspicion of cultural irrationality. At the core of the European model of a romantic sexual union still lies the deepening of sexual intimacy between partners, which provides this form of social organization not only with a recreational but also a spiritual meaning. Particular emphasis is placed on the methodological challenges inherent in cross-cultural studies of asexuality, including the lack of a standardized definition of sexual activity, linguistic limitations in expressing sexual experiences, and normative biases embedded in Eurocentric theoretical frameworks. The review warns against exoticizing the Japanese context and calls on scholars of family, marriage, intimacy, and pronatalism to adopt a more reflexive approach to their analytical categories.
