What Is Ingroup Bias?

Posted on by

Modern sociology and social psychology use the terms “in-group” and “out-group” to explain certain effects of interpersonal communication. The need to belong is probably at the foundation of the in-group versus out-group relationship in human mental perceptions. Ingroup versus outgroup perceptions are evolutionary or culturally developed stereotypes.

What Is an Ingroup?

An in-group is a group of people with which a person is psychologically associated and identifies himself or herself. The person feels that he or she belongs to this group.

Examples of such ingroups can be a person’s kin, own family, roommates, racial and ethnic groups, people of the same nationality—everything associated with the person’s social identity.

People use the term “we” to express themselves as the members of an ingroup. People of an ingroup tend to see similar values, opinions, norms, attitudes, and behaviors among the members of their ingroup.

People of an ingroup tend to like and tolerate each other, convey good will and help, and have a sense of solidarity. They feel unity and loyalty. They are cooperative and ready to support their ingroup members.

What Is an Outgroup?

An outgroup is a group of people that a person considers outside of his or her internal social circle. The person feels that he or she does not belong to that group. People of the outgroup can be the members of another tribe, another family, or people of another race, ethnicity, or nationality—anything not associated with the person’s social identity. These are outside groups.

People use the term “they” to identify others as members of an outgroup. They tend to see the values, opinions, attitudes, norms, and behaviors of members of outgroups as being dissimilar from their own ingroup. And they tend to dislike and avoid people from outgroups, showing them indifference, intolerance, or even hostility.

What Is Ingroup Bias? And Why Does It Matter in Love?

Individuals exhibit a positive attitude towards their own ingroup and its members. In-group bias is a person’s favorable predisposition toward people of his or her own group, their values, traits, attributes, and everything associated with their in-group. Such favoritism is especially pronounced in comparison to another group, which is known as “ingroup bias.”

Individuals exhibit negative attitudes towards their outgroup and its members. The tendencies to favor one’s own ingroup and its attributes are more evident than the tendencies to reject the outgroup and its attributes. Situations of intergroup contact activate both tendencies.

Members of an ethnic ingroup tend to exhibit ethnocentrism. And ingroup bias is a psychological mechanism that naturally works to support ethnocentrism.

An Evolutionary Perspective on Ingroup Bias and Love

Throughout evolutionary history, natural selection began to prefer “ingroup” prosocial dispositions and cooperation over antagonism. A set of human social traits and skills for favoritism arose and evolved. Neurobiological, paleoanthropological, and developmental studies are in support of his evolutionary conception (Hare, 2017).

Social bonds, care, and support within groups appeared to serve the evolutionary mechanism of human cultural evolution. Care was an active behavioral love for assisting others who were in need. People cared about those they loved.

In the early times of evolutionary history, love for kin, extended family, and one’s own tribal group evolved as a human survival mechanism. Later in social development, such community and family love evolved into ingroup favoritism and ingroup bias. This love in many cases was dutiful rather than free and voluntary.

“Love as a duty” was a type of love important for survival in the interdependent context of people’s lives (Karandashev, 2022).

The free romantic love became a luxury of life much later in human history. Some evolutionary theories, like Helen Fisher‘s, say that romantic love was one of the first things that brought people together to have children.

Actually, early people in a tribe were bound to love their kin and extended family (de Munck et al., 2016).

What Is the “Propinquity Effect”?

Posted on by

Generally, “propinquity” refers to proximity and nearness in space and time. It is the state of being close to something or someone. Sometimes, propinquity refers to a similarity of nature between people. What effect does the “propinquity effect” have on our liking and loving? 

Varieties of Propinquity

In sociology and social psychology, the term “propinquity” refers to the physical closeness and spatial proximity of one person to another. This can be, for instance, “residential propinquity”, acquaintance propinquity” or “marital propinquity.”

“Residential propinquity” refers to the tendency of people residing in the same neighborhood area to come together. Residential propinquity frequently works as a factor in friendship and marriage selection (see another article). For example, residential neighbors and residents living near a stairway in an apartment building tend to become friends more easily than those living further apart.

“Acquaintance propinquity” refers to the tendency of people living close to each other and seeing each other frequently to develop special bonds of interpersonal attraction. Propinquity predisposes people with a greater degree of physical proximity to being attracted to each other and becoming friends. For example, children and teenagers living in the same neighborhood, in the same apartment building, or going to the same school are more likely to become friends than others.

“Propinquity marriage” refers to the tendency of people residing in physical proximity to each other (within several blocks of each other) to select marital partners within such residential propinquity (see another post). It was based on real statistics of marriages when sociologists first investigated it in the first part of the 20th century (see another post).

In the last few decades, the increasing social mobility of people and the growing influence of virtual propinquity have changed the role of the propinquity effect.

Propinquity Effect in Social Psychology

In social psychology, this power of spatial or virtual proximity between persons is called the “propinquity effect.” This is the tendency of people to like others and develop an attraction to people they frequently encounter. Frequent exposure and interaction with another person act as driving forces in the formation of our close bonds with others.

American social psychologist Leon Festinger (1919–1989) and his colleagues proposed the “propinquity effect” in their paper “The Spatial Ecology of Group Formation” in the 1950s (Festinger, Schachter, and Back (1963/1950) . The authors of the article explained how frequent interaction with people aided in the formation of friendships.

Individuals encountering others in such spatial proximity began to like them, find them attractive, and develop close bonds. This propinquity effect can happen in schools, sports clubs, colleges, neighborhoods, workplaces, and other places where people see each other often. The propinquity effect is lower and the bonds are weaker with those we meet and interact virtually. 

The “propinquity effect” is closely related with the “mere exposure effect.” The mere exposure effect explains why propinquity increases liking of others. The more frequently a person perceives something or someone, the more they like them. Yet, such a mere exposure must be positive, not aversive. Only in this case does the propinquity effect work.

Among the Other Topics of Interest in this Regard Are:

How Expressive Is the Culture of Intimacy in a Relationship

Posted on by

The feeling of intimate belonging fulfills people’s needs for intimacy. However, people can satisfy their need to belong in various ways in different cultures, depending on their norms. A distinction between collectivistic (interdependent) and individualistic (independent) values is especially important for our understanding of intimacy as a fulfilled need to belong.

The Cultures of Intimacy in Collectivistic and Individualistic Societies

People in an individualistic, independence-oriented society like the United States are constantly assured from childhood that they belong and are loved. Yet, as they grow in childhood, parents encourage them to be independent and autonomous. Over time, they feel proudly autonomous, yet they may feel a little lonely. Parents are busy with their jobs and own problems. Therefore, teenagers strive to break through such lonely autonomy and look for other intimate bonds, such as moving in with someone else, marriage, and family.

People in a collectivistic, family-oriented society like Japan feel embedded in a family group from childhood. They implicitly feel these intimate ties with other members of the family. Therefore, they do not really need the reassurance of intimacy in family bonds. This is why they don’t really feel the need for another source of reassurance of intimate belonging from their marital partner, at least not to the same degree as people in individualistic cultures do.

What Is Special about Japanese Intimacy?

Some studies have shown that Japanese intimacy is not low – just different from North American and Western European views and notions of intimacy (see for review, Karandashev, 2019).

As I said above, Euro-Americans living in individualistic, middle-class, or urban cultures are proud of being independent in relationships. However, despite this feeling of being autonomous, they feel an obvious need to belong to their parents’ family.

When pushed out of their parental nest, they look for another source (a partner) to whom they could belong. And, as before in childhood, they need to feel from others that they are accepted and doing a “good job!” And they frequently do this to each other, both verbally and explicitly. It is because they have an implicit feeling of autonomy and independence. They need to hear that “they are doing great!” explicitly and repeatedly. Yet their need to belong must also be assured through direct verbal communication.

On the other hand, Japanese people have different cultural socialization strategies and childrearing philosophies. Children living in a collectivistic culture from birth already feel embedded in their family ties. Their model of attachment in childhood is culturally different. They are already aware of their intimate connections with other members of their family. Therefore, they don’t need constant and explicit verbal confirmation that they belong, as European Americans do (see, for instance, Keller, 2013, 2018).

This is why the Japanese may appear less direct in their intimate communication. It is because they understand it implicitly. However, Japanese couples in committed love relationships are high only in such qualities of intimacy as mind reading, compassion, assurance, and social network support (Roland, 1988).

Expressive versus Low-expressive Intimacies

The comparison of Japanese culture, as an East-Asian collectivistic culture, with European-American culture, as a Western individualistic culture of expressions of intimacy, might be simplistic. Many other non-collectivistic cultures can still be reserved and emotionally inhibited in their communicative preferences.

The difference in high-contact versus low-contact cultural values could be another explanation. Not only are Asian societies low-contact cultures (Barnlund, 1975; Klopf & Thompson, 1991; McDaniel & Andersen, 1998).

The Cultures of Low-Expressive Intimacies

People in Scandinavian and Nordic societies also display a low-expressive style of interpersonal interaction (see more in Karandashev, 2021).

Finns, like Norwegians and Swedes, prefer silent speech with relatively long pauses and slow-moving turns of speech. They often listen to each other without external evidence or feedback, yet this is their way of listening most attentively (Nishimura, Nevgi, & Tella, 2008; Tella, 2005).

For instance, in Finnish culture, people use the word “rakkaus” (love) only occasionally. Several other Finnish words implying the emotions of love without direct reference to the word “rakkaus” are also used by Finns (Haavio-Mannila & Roos, 1999).

Here is a folklore anecdote on Nordic marital intimacy. A Finnish couple, husband Eino and wife Aino, are celebrating their 5-year anniversary of marriage. She asked:

  • Eino, do love me?

Eino answered:

  • Yes, Aino, I already told you about this five years ago. If something changes, I will let you know.

This joking folklore anecdote is surely an exaggeration. But the reserved expression of intimacy is quite common for Nordic people, such as in Norway, Sweden, and Finland, as well as for East-Asian people, such as in Japan, China, and Korea.

Japanese Marital Intimacy

Posted on by

I noted in another article, “The Japanese Dating Culture of “Tsukiau” Relationships“, that men and women enjoy the tsukiau relationship to explore the freedom of intimate emotional and sexual relations. They do not feel any pressure or expectation to marry. Yet their relationship could lead to marriage.

What Is Japanese “miai”?

The tradition of “miai” (or, with the Japanese honorific prefix o- “omiai”) is a Japanese custom of relationship transition to marriage. It is similar to matchmaking in other cultures. This tradition has been modified in the context of modern Japanese lifestyles. After kokohaku (“confession”), a man and a woman enter a new chapter of their relationship development, which ultimately evolves into miai. An introduction to the parents follows, and marriage is seriously considered.

Some may see the process of “Omiai” as akin to arranged marriages. Sometimes, there is an outsider’s general assumption that arranged marriages are culturally normative in Japan. However, it is largely not the case nowadays. The real arranged marriages happen in Japan now quite rarely (probably less than in the 10-20% cases), mostly in rural areas, and substantially less in modern times (Relationships and Sexuality in Modern Japan. Last updated in 2011).

These days, many more marriages are formed out of mutual love for one another. Once the Omiai begins, actual dating means less than before. Successful “Omiai” implies that the man and woman go on a series of dates that result in a decision about whether they decide to marry or not.

  • If they decide to marry, they go through a formal marriage process called “miai kekkon.” The groom’s family typically arranges miai kekkon.
  • If they decide not to marry, they each go their separate ways.

Public and Private Sides of Japanese Intimacy

In Japanese culture, public displays of affection for a loved one—such as holding hands, kissing, hugging, or any intimate physical contact—are considered impolite, rude, or shameful. Many times, one would never guess that partners are actually a married couple. Publicly, Japanese tend to pretend that they are not in love.

This is why kissing is uncommon in Japanese films. Many people condemn kissing in public places. The majority of men would never kiss a woman in public. But if they would, they would feel embarrassed.

Any form of intimacy should be kept in private areas. In the home, children commonly say that they have never seen their parents kiss or express affection in any way.

It should be noted, however, that modern men and women of a young generation, especially in the larger cities, are slowly changing these old customs of public displays of affection.

Problems with Marital Intimacy in Japanese Culture

In general, traditional Japanese culture places a low value on psychological intimacy in marriage. Therefore, sharing one’s intimate self in companionship with one’s spouse has been less common (e.g., DeVos, 1985; Roland, 1988).

Even among many middle-class Japanese couples, psychological intimacy in marriage is still uncommon. There are two contextual factors that impede the formation of intimate relationships in marriage (Roland, 1988).

The men’s intimate psychological needs have usually been fulfilled in the circle of other men in the workplace. The intimacy of their friendship outside of work is uncommon among Japanese men.

The women’s intimacy needs have been satisfied in their friendships with other women and their relationships with their children. Because men generally spend long hours at work and then have rituals of lengthy socializing after work, it is difficult for women to create closeness in their marriage relationships.

The Japanese Dating Culture of “Tsukiau” Relationships

Posted on by

This article describes the Japanese dating culture. It is evident in the cultural practices of “tsukiau” relationships between men and women. These are some kinds of romantic relationships with Japanese cultural characters.

In another place, I consider when and how young Japanese start dating, what Japanese “group dating” is, and how “confession” serves as a step towards intimacy.

The Japanese word “tsukiau” (“going steady”) means steady dating relationships. Farrer and colleagues studied what and how young Japanese experience being involved in such relationships (Farrer et al., 2008).

What Are the Functions of Tsukiau Relationships?

Men and women engage in tsukiau relationships to enjoy the pleasure of intimate emotional and sexual relations and to experience feelings of closeness, comfort, and support. Like American dating, Japanese tsukiau relationships do not assume the imminence or expectations of a wedding or marriage.

Partners are aware of the various circumstances involved. And before making a marriage commitment, they weigh several conditions, such as personal, family, career, and financial obstacles. Therefore, they know they should wait for such a responsible decision.

However, their dreams, thoughts, and conversations about marriage still allow partners to express themselves. They discuss their prospects for the future. They believe that their romantic love (“renai“) and relationship will keep going.

How Intimate Japanese Men and Women Are in Their Tsukiau Relationships

When men and women are in “tsukiau” relationships, they perceive intimacy, along with passion and commitment, as their primary experiences. Partners assume and appreciate closeness, intimacy, and comfort. They like spending more time together (issho ni sugosu). For them, just being together brings psychological support (sasae), comfort (anshin, kokochiyosa), and even healing (iyashi).

When Japanese men and women are in a tsukiau relationship, then just being together is a way to express their personal feelings of love. A desire to be together is accompanied by an expectation of communication (komyunicasyon), dialogue (taiwa), and conversation (kaiwd) between partners.

They enjoy seeing each other by meeting up and talking in person (issho ni ini). They pay special attention to such events as the relationship anniversary, a partner’s birthday, Valentine’s Day, and “White Day.” They often exchange gifts and go to locations that have special meanings for them, such as the place of their first date. They go out, catch a movie, eat at a restaurant, or spend special time at home. These things bring joy and delight to their tsukiau relationship. All this communication reignites and strengthens their feelings of commitment while their relationships progress.

How Sexually Intimate the Japanese Are in the Tsukiau Relationship

Men and women in tsukiau relationships frequently engage in sexual intimacy. The expressed desire for sex (ecchi wo suru) is a central expression of passion (netsujou) and romance (koi). A formal “confession” (kokuhaku) establishes an expectation of sex. Having sex is a matter of course. It is the key feature that distinguishes being in a tsukiau relationship from simply being a friend. Many may have sex at least once a week.

For Japanese boys and girls, having sex is a way to increase communicative intimacy in the relationship. For many, sex looks like an intimate form of verbal and physical communication. Others pursue sex for the fulfillment of other motivations and emotions.

Excessive Intimacy and over-commitment can be a burden for Japanese men and women

Japanese men and women recognize that excessive intimacy and over-commitment can be perceived negatively as a burden (Farrer et al., 2008).

Expansive and accepted intimacy and commitment can restrict partners. In a tsukiau relationship, emotional attachments can evolve into implicit or explicit restrictions on a partner’s and their own behaviors, thoughts, and feelings. Men and women in a relationship acknowledge that they restrict their partners, just as their partners restrict themselves.

For example, controlling and monitoring the partner’s actions, thoughts, and jealousy impose such constraints. Excessive intimacy can make a person or their partner feel tethered and controlled. They can feel a loss of their independence. Therefore, sometimes they think of avoiding excessive restrictions (sokubaku), and feelings of excessive “restrictions” are among their frequent complaints.

According to the study, in more than 50% of cases, young Japanese people say they take restrictive measures against their partner. They also admit they have experienced such restrictions from a partner. Persistent expectations of the need for conversations, emails, and other messages sometimes make men and women in a tsukiau relationship feel irritated. Therefore, they tend to dislike, argue, and loathe such restrictions (Farrer et al., 2008).

Restrictive Intimacy, Obligations, and Trust in the Tsukiau Relationship

Emotional intimacy presumes and advances interpersonal trust. Nevertheless, apprehensive jealousy—even without any reasonable basis—is inevitable for some possessive people.

The obsessive thoughts and actions can become annoyingly restrictive. The explicit display of jealousy can undermine trust in a tsukiau relationship. Then, it is expected that partners should avoid expressing their feelings of jealousy.

Men and women in a tsukiau relationship may feel the intense and anxious emotions of their partners as overly weighty. When a partner is emotionally over-involved in a relationship, a person feels and expresses concerns, which the Japanese call “heaviness” (omoi). Many partners believe that such pressure and the “heaviness” of an overly committed partner should be avoided. Such serious over-involvement, feelings of heaviness, and disbalanced devotion can trigger a breakup (Farrer et al., 2008).

The Japanese Way of Dating

Posted on by

This article explains when and how Japanese dating takes place. Courting, dating, and marital relationships are the periods when men and women expect an intimate relationship and love to evolve. Across cultures, such practices vary in terms of time and degree of intimacy (Karandashev, 2017, 2019). 

When and How Young Japanese Start Dating

In Japan, many men and women start dating only after high school. In general, students in high school take their studies seriously. They are preoccupied with school, and parents generally discourage their teenage children’s dating.

In college and beyond, dating becomes important for young men and women. In Japan, many of them feel very shy at the beginning of a relationship due to the lack of communication with the opposite sex during their adolescent period.

What Is the Japanese “Group Dating”?

Due to cultural anxiety about intimacy, starting a relationship can be tense and overwhelming for many Japanese boys and girls. The practices of “gōkon,” or “group dating,” help eliminate the tension of interpersonal encounters in a traditionally collectivistic society. This kind of dating is quite popular among young Japanese people because they are very wary of one-on-one interaction when they first meet a partner.

When a young man and a young woman want to get to know each other, they often bring along three or four other eligible friends. They all meet up together, for example, in restaurants or bars.

After initial group communication and games, men and women get together in their circles, discuss who is interested in whom, and may exchange phone numbers and/or e-mails. Many in Japan still get to know each other through a third-party introduction.

In Japanese culture, being courteous is a priority, whether a boy or girl enjoys one another at a first meeting or not. Therefore, they tend to exchange messages after their first encounter, telling each other that they enjoyed their meeting and wish to continue going out again. Alternatively, they can simply thank the other for their time together without sending an explicit message that they are not interested in meeting again.

Confession in Love Is a Step Towards Intimacy

The rituals of “confessions” are evidently present in many societies in the precious relationship episode of saying “I love you” (“I like you a lot!”) for the first time in a relationship. It is a very special moment that signifies a new stage in a relationship. It is commonly known across many cultures.

This is a step forward to the intimate stage of a relationship if the other responds with “I love you too,” explicitly or implicitly. Such reciprocity is expected and anxiously awaited. A lover hopes to turn the page of a relationship into the next chapter. Such expectations of reciprocity, however, are not always fulfilled. The latter may turn the relationship down another path.

According to many cultural traditions, a man (or sometimes a woman) first declares their love for each other. In a sense, this confession means “Would you be my lover/boyfriend/girlfriend?” depending on the linguistic and cultural connotations accepted in a special cultural context.

What Does the Japanese Word for “Confession” in a Relationship Mean?

Kokohaku, or “confession,” is an important Japanese dating custom. In the Japanese cultural tradition, a man usually initiates the confession by asking a woman to go out. However, in modern dating practices, women may confess as much as men do. The Japanese “I love you” resembles the English “I like you.” However, the Japanese have their own serious words for love.

If the “confession” turns out to be reciprocal, a man and a woman enter another, more serious stage of magkasintahan. They become boyfriend and girlfriend, or lovers in a broad sense of the word. Their relationship soon becomes more serious and intimate (in various regards).

Love and intimacy evolve in what the Japanese call “tsukiau” relationships.

Interpersonal Self-Disclosure Differs in Different Cultures 

Posted on by

Self-disclosure is the way an individual communicates and shares personal information with another. Values and opinions, goals and aspirations, plans and thoughts, feelings and preferences, achievements and failures, fears and hopes, dreams and disappointments—all these internal personal things can be disclosed. They can be private and confidential to a greater or lesser extent. Some information can be sensitive because it makes a person vulnerable in a relationship.

Self-disclosure can be verbal or nonverbal. People differ in their willingness to self-disclose.

Cultural patterns of self-disclosure in romantic and marital relationships vary across societies. Societies differ in their cultural norms of how close the interpersonal relationship between partners should be and how emotionally intimate they should be in a close relationship.

Intimacy as Self-disclosure

Self-disclosure of personal information is the way to express intimacy in relationships. Partners do this both verbally and nonverbally. Many Western scholars and laypeople conceptualize intimacy as self-disclosure, as the way of revealing personal values, thoughts, and feelings to another person. Many European Americans consider such experiences and expressions as important things for personal growth and relationship satisfaction, while many Asians and Asian Americans don’t think this way.(Altman & Taylor, 1973; Derlega, et al., 1993; Ignatius & Kokkonen, 2007; Jourard, 1971; Sprecher & Hendrick, 2004, see Karandashev, 2019, for review).

Cultural Differences in Self-disclosure

Cross-cultural studies have shown that the degree of self-disclosure between American partners is usually higher than between Japanese or Chinese partners. These cultural differences might be due to their differences in individualism and collectivism as cultural values (Barnlund, 1975; Chen, 1995; Hocker and Wilmot, 1995; Gudykunst & Nishida, 1983; Ting-Toomey, 1991; see for a review, Karandashev, 2019).

For instance, spouses in North America communicate verbally more than Chinese spouses. Self-disclosure is frowned upon in Chinese culture, which encourages greater self-restraint in marital communication and limited self-disclosure. These differences can be due to differences in corresponding cultural values. Alternatively, people in different cultures can express their personal information and feelings in various ways (Chen, 1995; Hocker & Wilmot, 1995; Fitzpatrick et al., 2006; Juang & Tucker, 1991; see Karandashev, 2019 for a review). 

The boundaries and meanings of privacy, intimacy, and self-expression may differ across cultures. Various aspects of what is viewed as private, intimate, and public are culturally determined (Coffey, 2017; Heitler, 2012; Moore, 2003).

Self-disclosure in Individualistic Western Cultures

Western individualistic cultures consider self-disclosure as the prototypical expression of intimacy (Jamieson, 1998, 1999). For example, North American culture encourages men and women to communicate in relationships in an open, direct, and assertive manner. As a result, Americans naturally use self-disclosure to lower emotional distance and foster marital intimacy (Bradford et al., 2002; Hocker & Wilmot, 1995; Rosenfeld & Bowen, 1991; see for a review, Karandashev, 2019).

American men and women believe that self-disclosure with a partner is a vital process to achieve closeness in a relationship. This possibility reflects their individualistic ideals like independence, autonomy, self-assertion, and directness. This perspective appears to be more consistent with an American emphasis on verbal and non-verbal self-expression than with a Chinese emphasis on restraint and silence.

Self-disclosure in Collectivistic Eastern Cultures

Sharing personal information and the exchange of feelings are less important in East Asian cultural settings (Chen, 1995; Goodwin & Lee, 1994). For example, Chinese and Japanese cultural norms teach people to be restrained and reserved in interpersonal interactions. Societies frown upon being too expressive.

These cultural factors determine the manner of reserved self-disclosure in Chinese marital relationships. According to research findings, Chinese native spouses disclose less than North American spouses. For Chinese men and women, self-disclosure can reflect their collectivistic values like harmony, connectivity, and solidarity (Chen, 1995; Hocker and Wilmot, 1995; Fitzpatrick et al., 2006; Wolfson & Pearce, 1983; see for a review, Karandashev, 2019).

In Chinese households, disclosure is layered: the most intimate expressions are shared with the spouse, while less sensitive information is shared with other family members or strangers. As a result, in both cultures, a married relationship can be intimate yet linked to different social values (Ow & Katz, 1999).

What Is Closeness in a Relationship? It Is Culturally Diverse.

Posted on by

Scholars and laypeople frequently refer to psychological closeness in interpersonal relationships as “intimacy.” It might be either physical or emotional proximity, or their combination. It can be bodily, sexual, physical, emotional, or intellectual. The understanding of intimacy is also culturally diverse.

Intimacy is not the same as sex or sexual intimacy. “Being intimate and close” does not necessarily mean being in a romantic relationship. To various people, intimacy and closeness can mean different things.

Experience of Interpersonal Closeness in Love

Interpersonal closeness is behaviorally evident in such indicators as partners’ sleeping privacy and proximity, the organization of their eating, spending leisure time together, the husband attending the birth of his child, and other qualities of their interactions (de Munck & Korotayev, 2007).

Partners experience closeness in subjective feelings such as openness to self-disclosure. They express closeness through the sharing of intimate thoughts, feelings, and experiences, interdependence, and emotional warmth (see Karandashev, 2019 for a detailed review).

Romantic and marital interactions are not necessarily intimate or close. Intimacy as closeness is the feelings which develop through time when we connect with someone, grow to care for them, and become more and more comfortable being with them. Cultural values and norms for closeness between husband and wife are related to women’s status in a society. Intimate relations imply relative equality and a friendly disposition toward another with whom we are in a relationship.

Western European and European American Values of Interpersonal Closeness

The feeling of interpersonal closeness assumes that the other person is different and unique, that a person has a sense of self, and that he or she is autonomous from others. Western, individualistic societies that place a high value on interdependence also place a high value on interpersonal closeness.

The value of closeness varies across cultures (see, for example, Karandashev, 2019).

Intimate closeness in relationships is a highly valued experience in current Western societies. Many men and women in Western individualistic societies (such as countries in Western Europe, the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia) expect to establish emotional intimacy with their romantic partner and spouse. In their romantic and marital relationships, the higher degree of closeness is related to their higher physical, psychological, and relational well-being.

Western European and Euro-American research on romantic and marital relationships widely explores intimacy in the sense of a high degree of interpersonal closeness. C. Hendrick and S. Hendrick (1989), in their factor analysis of five love scales, identified closeness as one of the five major factors of love in their studies of American students.

The Value of Closeness in Eastern Cultures

On the other hand, traditional Eastern cultures may have different attitudes toward love and marital intimacy. Many collectivist and interdependent Eastern cultures place a lower normative value on romantic and marital intimacy.

In Eastern societies, the intimacy of heterosexual love has traditionally been less important. However, in those cultural contexts, conceptions of intimacy may be different (Karandashev, 2019).

Early cross-cultural studies revealed that American men and women have higher levels of intimacy in their love relationships than do Japanese people. East Asians have less intimacy in their marital relationships than Westerners (for a detailed review, see Karandashev, 2019). 

Interpersonal Closeness in Relationships Depends on Gender Equality

Gender roles and the status of women determine the norms of interpersonal intimacy in premarital and marital relationships. If a society values intimate relationships, then interpersonal relationships can develop beyond their “functional” requirements. For instance, the formation of intimate bonds between husband and wife is substantially less likely if the wife’s status is significantly lower than her husband’s (de Munck & Korotayev, 2007).

The extensive cross-cultural investigation conducted by de Munck and Korotayev (2007) has demonstrated several other interesting and important tendencies for public understanding.

  • Polygyny appears to stifle wife–husband intimacy in at least three ways: by increasing socialization for violence, lowering parental warmth levels, and lowering female kin power.
  • Large family sizes and dependence training may also restrain the development of wife–husband closeness.
  • When boys are socialized for aggressiveness, the development of close relations between wives and husbands within a given society is substantially less likely.

If, in a given culture, mothers expend a high level of maternal warmth toward their sons, then the development of intimate relations between wives and husbands is substantially more likely.

What Is Emotional Intimacy? It Is Culturally Diverse.

Posted on by

The word “intimacy” is widely utilized in modern scholarship and public discourse. Its frequent usage is perhaps comparable to the word “love.” Both are commonly used in diverse and vague senses. Some scholars and laypeople extensively use the word “intimacy” as a synonym for “love,” even though not every love is an intimate relationship. Others often use the word “intimacy” as a synonym for physical intimacy and sex, even though not every sex is intimate.

What Is Emotional Intimacy?

Many scholars use the word “intimacy” to describe psychological closeness and emotional intimacy between people. Relationship closeness deserves special attention from a cultural perspective.

The latter is the most adequate meaning, according to modern English and psychological science. Certainly, there are other directly associated meanings, such as togetherness, emotional connectedness, and affinity. Nevertheless, these words have different meanings.

The concept of intimacy is widely utilized in modern scholarly theories and research. For example, psychologists strive to understand and measure the physical, emotional, intellectual, experiential, and spiritual experiences of intimacy in love (Karandashev, 2017, 2019).

Positive and Negative Sides of Intimacy

In loving relationships, intimacy can have both positive and negative consequences. Intimacy produces the pleasurable feelings of comfortable attachment and trust. Yet it can bring a feeling of vulnerability, for example, in the case of dishonesty and deception. Romantic novels across languages and societies are full of intriguing stories of betrayals. It seems that “no one hurts us more than those who are closest and most intimate.”

Sounds familiar?

“They know it hurts me, but they do it anyway.”

Why so? Why do we hurt the most those we love the most?

The Cultural Diversity of Intimacy

The notion of intimacy appears even more intricate once we consider its diverse cultural interpretations and values. For instance, researchers have demonstrated that Western and Eastern cultures differ in their conceptualizations, experiences, and expressions of intimacy. Some cultures encourage intimacy between lovers, romantic partners, and spouses, while others do not (Castaneda, 1993; Hsu, 1985; Kumar, 1991; Seki, Matsumoto, & Imahori, 2002).

In various cultures, intimacy is more closely associated with a broad range of practices, such as sharing, caring, giving, providing resources, cooking, taking care of the house, and other practical ways.

The views from different cultural perspectives help us explore the diversity of intimacy. As researchers suggested, the differences in intimacy might be more complex, including different cultural understandings of intimacy, because patterns of intimacy are grounded in the cultural contexts of societies. Many case studies in diverse West African and North American cultures illustrate how the experience of intimacy reflects specific constructions of social reality and self (Adams et al., 2004; Karandashev, 2017, 2019; Seki, Matsumoto, & Imahori, 2002).

The case of emotional intimacy Japanese tsukiau relationships and the case of the long path of Japanese marital intimacy deserve special consideration.

The Italian Romantic Hero as an Ideal Latin Lover

Posted on by

This article on the website presents the recent study of Francesca Pierini, a lecturer from the University of Basel, Switzerland, as well as many other scholarly and literary examples of romantic ideals of male heroes. The author’s literary exploration described the narrative patterns of the Italian romantic hero. Her excellent review paper beautifully described the ideals of the Italian romantic lover.

The Literary and Cultural Stereotypes of Southern European Romantic Heroes

In contemporary Anglophone fiction, prominent descriptive patterns of the Latin, Spanish, and Italian people have shown these cultures as distinct constellations of counter-values to Anglo-American cultures and ethos. Literature and public discourse have depicted a particularly complex and multi-layered concept of culturally appealing “primitivism.” This viewpoint has found its way into a variety of cultural/artistic contexts, including Anglophone contemporary romantic novels, movies, and public discourse. For example, the Italian masculine hero, in both positive and negative aspects, is the recognized signifier of attractive otherness (Pierini, 2020).

Romantic novels describe the physical characteristics of Italian heroes as sensuous and alluringly dark men, implying an untrustworthy character and a hot and short temper. In these descriptions, mainstream beliefs about southern European machismo conflate with popular literary conventions about Middle Eastern cultures based on their apparent discontinuity with the modern world. The novels present Arab and southern European men as attractive because of their unusual and even exotic images.

Latin Lover

Italian and Spanish romantic heroes are often presented as Latin lovers. These romantic heroes resemble alpha males. These men are strong, hard, confident, dominant, and can be aggressive, yet they have a tender spot that the heroine uncovers. Writers frequently elicit mainstream assumptions about machismo as alpha maleness when creating the character of a Latin lover (Jarmakani, 2011).

A Latin lover is commonly known as a Latin man who is known for his romantic disposition, passionate temperament, and sexual aptitude. For the figure of the “Latin lover,” Pierini (2020) proposed the term “Mediterranean Man.” It implies a merger of the southern European and the Arab man.

What Does a Latin Lover Look Like?

The physical appearance of these men’s heroes is important. A couple of decades ago, the physical traits of the romantic hero were depicted in fascinating remarks on the dark color of their skin. Currently, such references look more like the remarks

on the “rich caramel coloring of his [the sheik’s] skin, giving true meaning to the description of tall, dark, and handsome.”

(Jackson, 2002/2017).

The Exotic and Erotic Latin Lover

British romantic novels often depict Spain as the land of a blazing sun, the flamenco, the castanets, the fiesta, the siesta, and bullfighting.

European romantic novels describe Italy quite similarly—in some regards—as a timeless land of a blazing sun, winemaking, and continuous traditions, as well as the people with long and unbroken family histories, the aperitivo, the pasta, and the siesta. The Italian romantic hero is frequently portrayed as an elegant Italian winemaker who is very attached to his family and parents. He is a successful, imposing, but compassionate man (George, 2014).

Darkness marks the Latin lover out as being exotic, erotic, and different. His dark hair, black eyes, and olive skin accentuate the cultural and ethnic differences. The heroine, with her English rose complexion and clear eyes, commonly signifies another cultural marker or metonymy (Pérez-Gil, 2019).

Romance stories depicts such exotic features as natural and inborn in . They appear as the outcome of genetic features—a “Mediterranean” DNA—rather than a social and cultural environment. Italian and Spanish men seem to have a sort of “Mediterranean DNA” that accounts for their physical traits (Pierini, 2020).

Masculinity of an Italian Romantic Hero

The typical image of an Italian romantic hero resembles, in a broad sense, a Mediterranean man. His blackness of the skin, eyes, and hair is a recurring theme. Authors frequently use the terms “dark eyes,” “dark stare,” “dark golden eyes and gaze,” “olive-toned complexion,” and “bronzed skin” in various combinations (see for review, Pierini, 2020).

Many romantic novels have repeatedly portrayed the stereotypical description of the Italian hero’s dark eyes and complexion. Writers often use the analogy of darker skin with chocolate, which is inviting, tempting, and essentially resembles a hedonistic food.

The idea of the domineering and primitive masculinity of a Latin lover, in contrast to English cold-bloodedness and sexual restraint, resembled “oriental men,” splendid, healthy, and predatory animals.

In the romantic depictions of Italian heroes, the recurring expressions frequently present

“olive-toned skin,” “chocolate eyes,” and “eyelashes, long and lustrous, fringed eyes the color of rich, melted chocolate, warm and tempting”

(see for review, Pierini, 2020, p. 6).

They have

“dark eyes,” “smouldering dark eyes,” “molten eyes,” or “dark, sultry eyes.”

(see for review, Pierini, 2020, p. 6).

They also have

“dark gaze” or “dark and compelling gaze,” “olive-toned flesh,” and “olive-toned hands.”

(see for review, Pierini, 2020, p. 6).

The Latin Lover as an Italian Playboy

For instance, in Anderson’s Between the Italian’s Sheets (2009), we read,

“Dazed, she studied the difference in their colouring.  She had come from a cold winter, so her skin was pale, whereas his olive complexion had been enhanced in the heat of the European summer”.

Or, another similar writing says:

“she stared hard into the darkness of his eyes, let hers roam over his features, his olive skin, the angled jaw that right now was shadowed with stubble, the full mouth”.

In The Playboy of Rome (2015) by J. Faye, author describes the Italian hero as “dark and undeniably handsome,”  with “tanned skin around his dark eyes.” The eyes are “dark and mysterious,” with a “dark gaze.”

In The Italian’s Christmas Child (2016) by L. Graham, author persistently repeats the expression “dark golden eyes.” And Vito, the male protagonist, is a “glorious display of bronzed perfection.”

Pierini (2020) presents many other examples of such romantic cultural descriptors. They allow us to compile an attractive ideal image of the romantic Italian lover.

What is a prototypical Italian man? How romantic is a Latin lover?

  • Does the real Italian man look like a prototypical Latin lover in love?
  • What is a prototypical Italian woman?