The Booming Japanese Rent-a-Friend Business (theatlantic.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report on The Atlantic which talks about a growing business in Japan wherein you can pay an actor to impersonate your relative, spouse, coworker, or any kind of acquaintance. The reporter has interviewed Ishii Yuichi, CEO of a Family Romance, a company that rents such actors. Yuichi believes that Family Romance, and other companies that provide a similar service can help people cope with unbearable absences or perceived deficiencies in their lives. In an increasingly isolated and entitled society, the chief executive officer predicts the exponential growth of his business and others like it, as a la carte human interaction becomes the new norm. An exchange between Yuichi and the reporter, from the story: Morin: When was your first success?
Yuichi: I played a father for a 12-year-old with a single mother. The girl was bullied because she didn't have a dad, so the mother rented me. I've acted as the girl's father ever since. I am the only real father that she knows.
Morin: And this is ongoing?
Yuichi: Yes, I've been seeing her for eight years. She just graduated high school.
Morin: Does she understand that you're not her real father?
Yuichi: No, the mother hasn't told her.
Morin: How do you think she would feel if she discovered the truth?
Yuichi: I think she would be shocked. If the client never reveals the truth, I must continue the role indefinitely. If the daughter gets married, I have to act as a father in that wedding, and then I have to be the grandfather. So, I always ask every client, "Are you prepared to sustain this lie?" It's the most significant problem our company has.

Comments

Re:wow

[Anonymous Coward]

I find the other extreme, regularly encountered in California, to be disgusting, depressing, etc (wearing emotions on sleeves; making every decision based on emotional whim; manufactured outrage; unable to live with being offended).

Re: do they have Prostitution as part of this?

[hey!]

The term in the sex trade I believe is "girlfriend experience". In addition to having sex with you the sex worker will also spend time pretending to love you. Since it's a higher level of service it naturally costs more.

I find the notion that something like that exists poignant. Although prostitution where it exists outside the protection of law is alarmingly exploitative, I have no fundamental objection to trading a few minutes of physical pleasure or relief for money. But creating a counterfeit experience smacks of an infantile retreat from the difficulties of genuine relationships.

In a world full of lonely people, the solution would seem to be obvious. But genuine intimacy requires risk and compromise. Compromise is increasingly a dirty word in our culture, but we fetishize risk, which is just another side of the same coin. A fetish isn't real; the kind of risk intimacy exposes you to *is* real. Nobody can disappoint, hurt or betray you like someone you love. But take away the danger, and what do you have left?

I don't have as much of a problem with playing a role where society conventionally expects someone to come with a date say, but I do have a huge problem with counterfeiting an important relationship, especially on a nonconsenting party: e.g., pretending to be a child's parent. And it comes down to the pain which only people you love can inflict on you.

Many modern societies aren't too different

[CustomSolvers2]

Even though this is certainly an extreme example (at least for me, not sure in Japan), lack of attachment to others and fake appearances are surprisingly common in most of societies. Internet and the way in which things like "social" media have evolved is a good reflection of that reality. Lots of people are not interested in actually knowing others, but only in blindly following trends, getting temporary certainty via poor information about everyone, having a high number of likes, friends, references, showing that they are happy/sad/angry, etc. Similar ideas apply to the real-life routines of many people, who are so scared of really giving and getting something (and, consequently, potentially losing/being hurt) that prefer to be systematically involved in meaningless relationships with others.

Some people might consider me some kind of hermit since some time ago, a person not able to enjoy the small pleasures of life or others' companion. This isn't true. The reality is that I am only interested in getting involved in somehow meaningful relationships, but most of people are not. Should I join the big circus of hypocrisy, meaning-nothing conventions, playing-very-safe-and-as-instructed and lies to eventually find just one worthy person? No, thanks. I did that in the past and know where it ends: tolerating more lies, hypocrisy, in-case-of-doubt attacks, unreasonable prejudices, etc. From my current position, I don't see a big difference between this article and what happens almost everywhere: people living to show and to do/be scared/angry/happy/etc. as instructed by whatever trend or convention, rather than really having/enjoying/experiencing. I don't even find any of this sad anymore.

Re:Many modern societies aren't too different

[bradley13]

The thing is: developing actual, meaningful relationships requires going through a lot of superficial crap. You don't know in advance which people you are going to be able to relate to, so you sample around, and you first meet lots and lots of people who don't work out for you. If you don't go to that trouble, just how are you supposed to magically meet the rare person you actually hit it off with?

Now, you may say "it's not worth it". And who would I be to disagree? I make about 1 good friend every 20 years, because I mostly can't be bothered to socialize. But be aware that this is the price you pay for being a "hermit".

Re:Very sad

[mark-t]

A professional escort is not generally obligated to lie to others about who they are.

Re:Hm..

[citylivin]

"I believe that even if the USA adopted the exact same laws that Japan has, gun violence in the USA wouldn't change very much."

Then you are a fool. As a canadian, I've been in physical encounters with people where they have drawn weapons. If I or they had a gun instead of a knife, things would have ended much worse for someone.

It is nearly impossible to get a legal handgun in canada. Most guns used in crimes are smuggled from the USA at extreme risk. And if you carry it around and someone sees that, you are going to jail.

Like it or not, if you want to change the culture of gun violence in the USA, you have to start by restricting gun sales. That means depriving people of owning guns that are not meant for hunting. All automatic weapons, all hand guns, and probably more types too (i am not an expert on guns, nor would i care to be). It means getting people to give up the "personal self defence" aspect of gun ownership. I doubt anyone has guns for that purpose in canada, simply because they are so restricted with how you can transport them and use them, any situation where you would need to have the gun "at the ready" for defence, simply wouldn't be possible.

So i would argue that you have no idea about canadian gun laws and how they are influencing society. The laws shape the culture. I'm not sure how you could possibly miss that fundamental point. When americans say that the government can't take away their guns, that statement is clearly part law and part culture. Change the laws and you would change the culture, for sure.