Street Harassment in Korea

A little over six weeks since launching Hollaback! Korea I have already read about 20 stories from members of our community. I have also seen hundreds of people step up to join our project to end street harassment. At our events and during interviews, a number of people who have not written their stories and shared to the site have also discussed the issue with me.

An audience member at our Bystander Intervention Workshop

I am frequently asked, "What is Hollaback?"

Hollaback is an international movement to end street harassment that is active in 24 countries and over 71 cities in 10 languages. By street harassment, we refer to sexist, racist, transphobic, homophobic, ableist, sizeist and/or classist harassment that often targets women, LGBTQ and transgender community members. This harassment takes place in public places like parks, the subway, on the street or in a shop. Street harassment can be intimidating behavior intended to make the target uncomfortable or scared. It can be verbal, physical, gestures or noises, and other forms of intimidating behavior.

"How was Hollaback! Korea founded?"

We are organizing this project all over Korea, but particularly in Seoul, Gwangju, Jeju, Seosan, Daejeon and Daegu. I started to recruit founding team members last July and we all participated in a 3 month online training course and supported by the iHollaback international team so that we could prepare for the launch in early December. We had a lot of hard work like translating the website and mobile app into English, planning 5 launch events in Seoul, Gwangju and Jeju, moderating and growing our social media presence on Facebook and Twitter, and doing media and press outreach. I am really grateful to our team for their dedication and to our community for their warm welcome.

"How does Hollaback! address street harassment?"

Hollaback! has empowered people in over 70 cities and 24 countries internationally to respond to street harassment through a smartphone or web application. Users are encouraged to speak up when they see harassment by quickly documenting it in a short post (photo optional) and sharing it to a publicly viewable map. Anyone browsing the stories on the Hollaback! maps immediately understands 3 things:

1) If you’ve been harassed, you’re not alone,
2) Street harassment is used to exert control over others by making them feel scared or uncomfortable. It is much more than individuals just acting inappropriately.
3) There are street harassment “hotspots” in most cities often centered around high pedestrian traffic areas.
Hollaback! provides comfort to those harassed, and proof that street harassment is a serious problem warranting a serious response from policy makers.

"Is Hollaback! Korea different from other sites because of domestic law?"  

First, it is important to note that our project is about support and social awareness. We are primarily focused on supporting those targeted for street harassment and to promoting public outreach to stop harassers. We believe that what specifically counts as street harassment is determined by those who experience it.  If you’ve experienced street harassment, we’ve got your back! I highly recommend speaking with an organization like Korea Womens Hotline for more detailed analysis of the law, but I can make some personal observations about Korea law.

I think that the Korean legal system is one of the most well organized in the world. Of course there are differences in legal codes country to country, for example, some countries recognize a Good Samaritan code more than Korea. This means that if you intervene to protect someone in danger you get some consideration for being a Good Samaritan. A major difference might be that although Hollaback users in New York and other cities can post the face of their harasser, on our site we have to blur the face and the names of any businesses in the image. We can, and do, post images, but the face has to be blurred. Some countries have more extensive laws covering street harassment than Korea and some do not have such laws. Right now there is a public indecency law with a fine of 30,000 won on the books.

Learn more

I was recently invited to TBS eFM for an interview about Hollaback! Korea to discuss street harassment and have shared the interview below.

Extended Rebuttal: Inflated Assumption that Sex Workers in Korea Earn “higher than the average Korean”

Here at Korea Gender Café we attempt to present information, data and translations that add to discussion of gender issues in Korean society because we hope to spur discussion. 

Yesterday we submitted a rebuttal piece to koreaBANG’stranslation “Disbelief as Korea is Ranked 108th in Global Gender Equality” that broke down a few methodological flaws in Dr. Kang’s data analysis. Due to space constraints we were unable to respond point-by-point to many of his opinionated assertions. In this post we’d like to zero in on one of the problematic opinions and attitudes he brought into the debate about gender inequality: that the exclusion of the sex industry from workforce participation data inflates the inequality between men and women.

Kang writes,

“Does the misinterpreted data about socioeconomic discrimination in fact imply discrimination against men? 

There are also many problems with the data commonly used to claim sexualdiscrimination against women within Korea. The popular story is that women arebeing discriminated against, as shown by the big gender gap in employment rateand income. However, we need to take a closer look. In fact, the gender gap in employment rate and income is exaggerated in Korea.Among OECD countries, only Korea and Slovenia have made the sex trade completely illegal. MOGEF estimated that there might be 140~270k or a higher number of female sex workers in Korea. Sex workers who earn more than the average worker are exempted from the Korean income statistics while othercountries include them. This partly contributes to the income gap that appearswider on paper than it really is. 

Do they turn a blind eye to this for the sexual discrimination claims?” 

In our submission to koreaBANG we began to respond:

“Dr.Kang points out human rights violations against women in other countries, butwe can point to sexual violence and human rights violations in every country.That is not the purpose of these indices. We agree that it is problematic thatgender inequality indexes do not adequately reflect violence against women orsexual violence. We disagree with Dr. Kang’s outward looking criticism andencourage discussion of sexual violence in Korea.” 

To elaborate, if we want to discuss human rights violations in South Korea, we could pay close attention to the upcoming Constitution Court ruling on the 2004 Act to Prevent Sex Trafficking and Prohibit Prostitution.

First, sex work is omitted from income statistics, as is drug trade, gang/mafia membership and other illegal industries in which we may find both women and men employed. Rather than claiming that its exclusion is an conspiracy to "turn a blind eye" and that it implies "discrimination against men" we find this to be a more persuasive explanation. 

Second, this assumption that sex work earns high incomes likely ignores workplace conditions, rental fees, the lack of pension, income inconsistencies, associated costs, and may obscure all those that profit from the work by taking a portion of fees, etc. 

Third, Dr. Kang does not tell us how many men are employed as sex workers, but some could argue that purchasing the right to sexual use of another’s body in a sex industry with “140~270k or a higher number of female sex workers” in and of itself could be indicative of gender inequality. If the working population is that high while the working population is low in other industries, it suggests there is a segregation of women into a few industries.  

Fourth, others could argue that Dr. Kang ignores men employed in the sex industry or who act as employers of female sex workers. Meanwhile MBN News contributes a stigmatizing tone toward LGBTQ sex workers. 

But what we would really like to argue about -- and the reason we highly anticipate the above mentioned Constitutional Court ruling -- is the persistent social stigmatization of sex workers and violation of sex worker's human rights in police crackdown and incarceration.

First, Dr. Kang never mentions that male clients are only sometimes sent to “John school” while female sex workers pay steep fines and face up to 2 years of mandatory re-education or prison. This is one more example of gender inequality in sentencing. Dr. Kang doesn’t highlight those aspects of policy that actually exist, and he presents no evidence to support his assertions.

Second, sex workers in Korea report serious human rights violations as a consequence of the current legal regime. Sex workers report swallowing condoms because simply walking with a condom is used by the police as evidence against a sex worker. The safety and health implications are rather obvious, but we urge you to read the UNDP report "Sex Work and the Law in Asia and the Pacific: Laws, HIV and human rights in the context of sex work."[1]

Third, heavy stigmatization of females in the sex industry means that even if there were not criminal penalties, gender inequality in sentencing and health perils associated with an aggressive police crackdown, workers are marginalized socially. We highly recommend Katherine Moon’s research for further reading on the history of segregated sex workers near military bases.[2] 

My ongoing research examines the relationship between the 2004 law, court sentencing and gender in Korean society. In the coming months and after publication, I look forward to sharing additional information with our readers. In the meantime, we highly recommend reading posts by sex worker’s rights NGO Giant Girls, 성노동 이론 봇 and Research Project Korea for news. 

For further reading:

Giant Girls, Grant Application, Global Fund for Women, 2010. https://grants.globalfundforwomen.org/GFWSearch/index.php?id=30551

한상희, 건국대 교수, 헌법. “성매매방지법과 여성인권” 민주법학 제30호, 2006.

최우리 기자, "당신이 굳게 믿는 그것이 진리일까," 한겨레,  2012.12.01. http://media.daum.net/society/newsview?newsid=20121201111004557

Cheng, Sealing. “Rethinking “Human Trafficking”: Reflections from South Korea” in Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, MIDDLE EAST PROGRAM & UNITED STATES STUDIES, OCCASIONAL PAPER SERIES, Rethinking Human “Trafficking,” SUMMER 2010.

Godwin, John. "Sex Work and the Law in Asia and the Pacific: Laws, HIV and human rights in the context of sex work." United Nations Development Programme, Oct 2012, p. 112. http://asia-pacific.undp.org/

Kim, Ji Hye. Korea’s New Prostitution Policy: Overcoming Challenges to Effectuate the Legislature’s Intent to Protect Prostitutes from Abuse. Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal Association, 2007

Moon, Katherine. Military Prostitution and the U.S. Military in Asia, The Asia-Pacific Journal; Japan Focus, Jan 17, 2009.

Weiss, Ayla. Ten Years of Fighting Trafficking: Critiquing the Trafficking in Persons Report through the Case of South Korea, Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal [Vol. 13:2, 2012].

[1] Godwin, John. "Sex Work and the Law in Asia and the Pacific: Laws, HIV and human rights in the context of sex work." United Nations Development Programme, Oct 2012, p. 112. http://asia-pacific.undp.org/

[2] Moon, Katherine. Military Prostitution and the U.S. Military in Asia, The Asia-Pacific Journal; Japan Focus, Jan 17, 2009.

Solidarity is for White Women in Korea, too. Re: The Fear of Becoming a Housewife

Let’s talk about how so many writers lazily toss around Confucianism and its’ impact on gender roles in Korean society. Let’s pursue alternate, more complicated and more rigorous discussions of Korean society. At stake is not only intellectual rigor, but the pursuit of mutual understanding that can only be achieved when we stop recklessly dismissing cultures when we could be building solidarity. Although there are many pieces in which we encounter the assertion that Korean gender roles are Confucian, I am going to point to a piece by Megan Harper who recently contributed “THE FEAR OF BECOMING A HOUSEWIFE” to Groove Magazine.

Harper writes (emphasis mine),  

“This year, I married a Korean man. He isn’t “Korean-Korean,” which is our code to mean he is comfortable with the ways of life outside of the peninsula.”

"He understands the limits that Confucianism places on women and tries his hardest to understand my expectations of equality."

"I have met many women with advanced degrees in subjects such as Russian literature, Chinese and graphic design who abandon all career goals once they marry. Or maybe it is because many of the young women I work with consider university to be simply a way to meet a wealthy man and become his housewife."  

"What I was not prepared for, though, was the depth of his parents’ gender roles, my feelings toward their way of life and the effect these things would have on my ability to relate to his parents. It is hard to hide my discomfort when I see my mother-in-law prepare a beautiful dinner that her husband has half eaten before she even has a chance to sit down. I cannot understand why she tolerates this lack of family assistance. Although I am embarrassed by my own narrow-mindedness, this type of event, and my perception of her, makes it very difficult for me to relate to her; my own refusal to take on the “housewife” role has made it hard for me to embrace this woman.

I know that traditional gender roles continue to exist in my own culture, but they feel much more limiting in Korea. Perhaps it is because, as an outsider, they are easier to see." 

When I hear similar comments from Americans (ex. I frequently hear something like "At Chuseok all the men drank and all the women cooked and cleaned, can you believe how sexist Korea is?") I add this bit of analysis: Perhaps it is easier to see Korean women this way because I was raised in a culture that stereotypes Asian women, I was raised falsely to think that my culture has the 'most' gender equality, I was raised in a culture willfully blind its own exploitation of Asian women. It is important for people from my culture to unlearn some of the racism and nationalism we were raised with. .

TO SUMMARIZE the piece, the author (not Korean) discusses a process of negotiating gender role expectations with her (Korean, but not so-called “Korean-Korean) husband. The author also reflects on her own attitude toward her (I guess the author would say, “Korean-Korean”) “traditional” mother-in-law’s gender role and Korean women's sacrifices for family. The piece emphasizes a link between “traditional Korean” (Confucian) culture and gender role expectations, contrasting this with only the briefest of references to her own culture. Her unnamed and largely un-examined culture is not subjected to the same lens. The key words used to describe women and her home culture include: equality, independent, respectable, equalized gender roles, etc. 

Honestly, at first I wanted to get behind the effort the author says she is putting into understanding her mother-in-law, but ultimately found the piece somewhat offensive and the cultural explanations kind of lazy and stereotypical. This is no doubt because SO MUCH of our dialog in English-language literature talks about Korea in this way. I struggle to find English newspapers abroad that don’t talk about Confucianism in every piece about Korea, even when it is about a plane crash >.< Even many Korean friends and classmates will emphasize Confucianism instead of other explanations possibly because it has become a quick and easy way to describe and emphasize perceived differences. Back to what the Grand Narrative dubbed 

The fear of becoming a (Korean) housewife http://t.co/aVd9RuO7ux
— JamesTurnbull (@JamesTurnbull) September 9, 2013

the author concludes,

"I hope to share with others my unexpected limit in understanding that arises from my own gender role expectations. Regardless of my mother-in-law’s reasoning, it is futile for me to judge her. I will strive to respect her for the sacrifices she has made while using my own life to demonstrate equalized gender roles."

FIRST and FOREMOST I have to critique the way that the author positions her life as a demonstration of equalized gender roles to her mother-in-law. Despite prior reflections on trying to be open-minded, the piece asserts a instructive superiority of a not 'Korean-Korean' life and mindset over a 'Korean-Korean' life and mindset. The author also leaves out a lot of incredibly important context about these so-called 'equalized gender roles.' This discussion may also reveal our blindness to our own privileges and complicity in exploitation that we externalize and blame on others and other cultures.

LET’S START with how not unique to Korea it is to have a mother-in-law that does the majority of the housework or who has ‘traditional’ views about gender, motherhood or being a wife. Personal disclosure, I recently married an American man and my mother-in-law and I have some quite different and some shared views about culture and gender roles even though our citizenship is the same. Before my partner, I once lived with a long-term with a partner and his mother who migrated to the US from Mexico. My partner’s mother and I also had some different and some shared attitudes about culture and gender roles despite not having the same citizenship. I lived in a homestay in Korea for over a year, and once again similar and different ideas about gender roles. My mom did all the cooking and cleaning except for once a week when my father typically ordered in food and dumped trash. Guess what, if you are raised by a single mom (as I later was, and as my cousins were), who is it that is doing the cooking and cleaning? I bet it is usually still mom and not dad. Thinking about the men in my life growing up, I have an uncle who migrated from Greece to the U.S. Another uncle migrated from Iraq. During all of the Catholic, Jewish, Orthodox Catholic, and Islamic holidays, also during the Chuseoks, Thanksgivings, the quinceañeras, even during the national holidays and other special occasions that I have attended and participated in, women did the cooking, the cleaning, the care and love work. 

NEXT, the author is worried about becoming a Korean housewife and wants to keep working. I would like to see a follow-up reflection by the author on how she engages her husband, husband’s boss, her boss and most importantly her mother-in-law or possibly a nanny in a few years when she wants to keep working and is struggling to find daycare. Will grandma be more relatable or her gender role more appreciated when the time comes to make that decision? Though, I honestly really hope we don’t need that reflection because I hope SOME administration will start taking social welfare policy seriously.  

I sense a rebuttal: So you say American women and European women's workforce participation has surged? Let's break that down a bit, too. Women in my family, a grandma or an aunt not working outside the home, absolutely took on the care work while both or a single parent were working. Let's look at broader social trends. At the same time that women's workforce participation in the US and Europe has surged, simultaneously world migration trends reflect a major shift toward a majority of migrants being female? In origin societies we see complex family decisions over whether or not to send daughters and wives abroad for migration to destination states in Europe and the Americas. Migration patterns all over the world are pushed by gender roles that haven’t changed THAT much in the ‘West’ and by economic competition that compels all sorts of changes in societies. What work are female migrant laborers doing? Largely care, reproductive and sexual labor. How many affluent households in the U.S, in Western Europe, in Korea and Japan are replacing middle and upper-class family housewives with migrant or increasingly 'competitive market-solution' labor like fast food, boutique daycare, dry cleaners, etc.? I love all the fancy jargon we (myself included!) use to glorify and add scientific weigh to our own cultural solutions while we dismiss other countries for having ‘traditional’ or in this case ‘Confucian’ solutions.

FINALLY, let’s get to Confucianism. I don't think the author understands Confucianism and how it has transformed and been transformed by Korean society. Nor do I think the author tries to think of other explanations besides Confucianism. The Confucian card is over played and we are missing out on better explanations. Too often, writers use Confucianism as a neat and tidy quick way to dismiss something in Korea as essentially 'pre-modern' while simultaneously failing to make any further inquiry into Korea's modern history and society.

In particular, let’s drop the 'backward Confucian Korea' trope and seek more nuanced explanations. Frankly, in the context of this piece, the Confucian trope pretends that all issues in Korean society today are 'pre-modern' and tied to some ingrained sexist cultural/religious though pattern. I think that bit of explanation is tidily left off because that would implicate modern structures all over the world and also require consideration of Korea's colonial and occupied recent history. In turn, this ignores the role of government intrusion into family life in modern Korean history, and especially the mobilization of family and housewife for a decidedly neo-liberal international market. Was Park Chung Hee acting in accordance with Confucianism or aligning policy with the cold war and international markets?

Furthermore, is that mobilization of women and family an isolated experience in Korea? No. Even seen a poster of Rosie the Riveter? Or a war-time volunteer nurse? Or a Red Cross volunteer knitting socks? Oh, those examples are too distant and you don’t want to compare US and Europe in WWII to post-colonial and Korean War recover era Korean workforce mobilization? What happens to American and European women during recession? Hours and benefits cut to keep “more people at work” rather than all-out cutting jobs? Funny how we keep reading that women and people of color in America are disproportionately losing benefits and having hours cut.

Like the Americas and Europe, Korea has also had mobilization of women for home labor, for labor in manufacturing and unpaid care labor for troops, students, husbands and sons, and so has every other country ever. How can we use Confucianism as the sole explanation for anything in Korean society while ignoring the influences of religion (Protestantism anyone?), Japanese colonial state education of women for low pay low skilled labor (Thank you NEW RIGHT textbook revisionism, what a TRIUMPH that was for gender equality), US-ROK economic ties and international markets that mobilized men abroad to wars and oil fields, rapid modernization pressures and lacking social safety nets. I don't have a full explanation, but lazily tossing around "Confucianism" isn't good enough and we need to start a better dialog about societies. More urgently, we need to keep promoting less offensive conversations about Korean women, men and their families. Not just on blogs but also in news media and academia, too.   

Maybe in Korean society we need a dose of something similar to what intersectional feminism and the recent #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen dialog represent in the US. As feminists, let’s stop dismissing other women’s culture and start listening. This dialog would be a vital precondition for really working together to face inequality and other challenges we face in our societies.

I’m guilty of some laziness too, that’s why I need to keep listening, studying, reflecting and looking for other viewpoints. Re-reading some of my posts on this blog, I realize that in my living and studying process I’ve changed my views quite a lot over the past 14 months of blogging about gender and Korean society. Thank you to readers and critics and friends for your dialog. Since I know I am also in a privileged space where I can access information as my full-time occupation, to spread some of that around, here is a short reading list that inspires much of what I have written here:

Chang, KS and MY Song. 2010. “The stranded individualizer under compressed modernity: South Korean women in individualization without individualism” The British Journal of Sociology 61(3): 539-564.

Cheng, Sealing. "Sexual Protection, Citizenship and Nationhood: Prostituted Women and Migrant Wives in South Korea," Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. Vol. 37, No. 10, Dec. 2011.

Cho, Uhn, “The Encroachment of Globalization into Intimate Life: The Flexible Korean Family in “Economic Crisis”” Korea Journal 45(3), 2005.

Cho, Joo-hyun. “Neoliberal Governmentality at Work: Post-IMF Korean Society and the Construction of Neo-liberal Women” Korea Journal 49(3): 2009.

Nelson, Laura, “Measured Excess: Status, Gender, and Consumer Nationalism in South Korea,” 2000.

Parreñas, Rhacel Salazar. Servants of Globalization: Women, Migration, and Domestic Work, published by Stanford University Press, 2001.

Kim, Hyun Mee. "The State and Migrant Women: Diverging Hopes in the Making of “Multicultural Families” in Contemporary Korea" in Korea Journal, Winter 2007.

Yi, Eunhee Kim, “’Home is a Place to Rest’: Constructing the Meaning of Work, Family and Gender in the Korean Middle Class,” Korea Journal 38(2), 1998.

Slut-shaming the Parent Hurts the Child: Chief Prosecutor Chae Dong-wook, the Blue House and Korean Media

Slut-shaming the Parent Hurts the Child: 

Chief Prosecutor Chae Dong-wook, the Blue House and Korean Media

TODAY the Joongang Daily brought us “Love child report roils prosecutors, Blue House.” 

THE media knows very little about this case, and I know even less. Chief Prosecutor Chae Dong-wook may have a 10-year-old child outside of marriage. The second point of speculation centers on whether or not Chae paid for housing for his alleged son:

“In his confirmation hearing, Chae reported that his assets amounted to 1.25 billion won ($1.14 million), which included a 32-pyeong (1,138.7 square feet) apartment worth 654 million won in Irwon-dong, southern Seoul and 440 million won in savings. 

If the alleged son’s housing was paid for by Chae, he made a false report about his assets.

Chae rented out the apartment and currently lives in a nearby apartment with his wife and a daughter, having paid jeonse, or a lump-sum deposit, in lieu of rent. The jeonse was 450 million won."

HERE is where it gets really ugly:

“One of the reasons the Blue House named Chae as prosecution chief was because he was considered relatively clean in terms of financial background and also hadn’t dodged the draft.

“We never knew about this,” a spokesman of the Blue House told the JoongAng Ilbo. “If we knew about this, how could we possibly have appointed Chae as the prosecution chief?”

But there is contrary speculation that the Blue House, National Intelligence Service and officials of the ruling party were aware of Chae’s personal background, and details have now been leaked by a group that doesn’t want him leading the prosecution anymore.”

IN saying “If we knew about this, how could we possibly have appointed Chae?” The Blue House Spokesman does not seem to be referring to the false report of his assets in April. In that case, the Blue House Spokesman could say something like “We are deeply regretful that Chae has betrayed the public trust by not fully disclosing this information about his asset holdings.” It seems far more likely that the Blue House Spokesman is talking about Chae having a child out-of-wedlock.

ONCE again, the media knows very little about this case, and I know even less.  What I do know is that less than 13% of men in Korea pay child support to the unwed mothers who care for their children.[1]  So here we have Chae, who is providing for his son – in a social context of extreme stigmatization against children born to unwed mothers – being heavily criticized not so much for failing to come clean about his financial background, but is being attacked because “of Chae’s personal background.” 

SO, what message does this send to the 87% of men who father children out-of-wedlock? Definitely not to come clean and take responsibility for their children by paying for child support. If an unwed father did that, then the Blue House would know about his "personal background" and how could they ever appoint him to a high position or promote him? By slut-shaming either mother and father, Korean society, the media and now the Blue House show disregard for the human rights of children born out to unmarried parents. This attitude permits discrimination against children, denies them the right to support and care, and sends a broad social message that condemns their birth. 

THIS pervasive attitude may be tied to Korea’s repeated critique at UN committee hearings for Korea’s failure to adhere to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The stigmatization of children and their unwed parents is tied to socio-economic consequences that deny these children equal opportunity under the law. Back in 2003 UN CRC concluding observations started to call attention to the fact that Korea insufficiently addresses “development of public education campaigns to combat discriminatory attitudes towards girls, disabled children and children born out of wedlock” and also expressed concern over the “limited amount of information regarding acts of discrimination against children from single parent families, children born out of wedlock, children with disabilities.  It is also concerned that the Constitution does not explicitly prohibit discrimination on the grounds of factors including disability, birth or other status, as stated in the Convention.”[2]  We also urge readers to take a look at our Korean Gender Café discussion on the stigmatization of unwed mothers and their children to find links to additional reports, summary of important data and interviews with unwed parents.  

FINALLY, let’s also talk about hyperbolic writing. The article opens “The criminal justice system was thrown into confusion early yesterday by a news report that disclosed an out-of-wedlock son of chief prosecutor Chae Dong-wook in the middle of a high-profile insurrection case and charges that the nation’s spy agency interfered in last year’s presidential election.” Really? Was the criminal justice system was thrown into confusion by the news of an out-of-wedlock son, or by the charge of corruption and insurrection by the nation’s leaders? The latter issues are far more threatening to the criminal justice system than an out-of-wedlock birth.

I WISH the justice system WERE thrown into confusion by a child born out-of-wedlock … maybe in that case the legal system would actually hold parents accountable for child support, protect the best interests of a child by keeping them with their family members, and promote healthy acceptance of all families, thereby promoting children’s equal rights and safe access to shelter, love, healthcare and education.

---

[1] According to KUMSN and KWDI, 56.8%  of unwed mothers earned less than 1 million, 23% earned 1-1.5 million won, and only 20.2% had a monthly income of more than 2 million won per month. Only 14.6% of unwed mothers were receiving child support. Only 12.7% of divorced parents received child support from their ex-spouses. Source: Strengthening the Responsibility of Unwed Fatherhood, KUMSN & KWDI Conference, 2013.

[2] See linked "UNITED NATIONS CRC, Convention on the Rights of the Child,CRC/C/15/Add.197 18 March 2003, "CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BYSTATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 44 OF THE CONVENTION, Concluding observations:Republic of Korea."  

Sexual Violence as a Migrating Woman, Re: India Story You Never Wanted to Hear

(Or maybe we could also call this “Sexual Violence as a Migrating -- queer, socio and economically disadvantaged, mostly white and white-passing, able-bodied, educationally privileged, American, cis -- Woman, Re: India Story You Never Wanted to Hear”)

Reflection on Violence while Migrating

RoseChasm shared her experiences of sexual harassment during a study abroad program and her PTSD mental leave of absence from school to CNN iReport "India: the Story You NeverWanted to Hear" on August 18, 2013. (Updated) A response iReport "Same India-Different Story" by twoseat affirms the reports of sexual harassment and also brings a discussion of racism and nationalism. CNN also posts a lengthy statement to the story.

WHEN I reposted this iReport to my own Facebook wall, I wanted to de-emphasize India in the headline, so I wrote “This is a story about sexual harassment and street harassment.” The reason that I de-emphasize India is because I am hesitant to participate in uniquely calling out India for violence against women. I have not been to India. I have travelled in other countries and I have heard first-hand from friends abroad and in the U.S. with similar experiences of street harassment, sexual assault and violence against women. In my view, women who are migrating may be treated differently and/or targeted for violence.

ON this blog post, I hope to further emphasize this point and discuss migration, race and other factors that affect experiences of sexual violence. Sexual assault and harassment are global in scope, but I think survivors experiences (and certainly my own experiences) can be affected by shifts in privilege associated with migration.

I have experienced sexual violence in the U.S. and Korea. Perhaps like RoseChasm I also find it difficult to discuss for a number of reasons. In particular, it is difficult for me to discuss the violence I have experienced in Korea because I want to share deeply complicated contexts and personal ideas that are not easy to sum up. I do not want those listening to my story to think that it is a story about Korea - because it isn’t a story about Korea - my story is about sexual violence. The mechanisms of violence against women in Korea and in the U.S. may differ in some specific ways (location, context, dialog, tone and cues) but they are more alike than different. The stigmatization of women and sex, denial of reproductive rights, slut-shaming, rape culture, poor funding for women’s social services, restricted access to quality ob/gyn care, police and legal discrimination, etc. are common to both societies and found world-wide. However, comparing my experiences of sexual violence in the U.S. and Korea, some differences do emerge, and I tend to think they are related to my own position in society and particularly my citizenship and race.

IN the United States I have experienced sexual violence and felt relatively assured of and informed about my legal rights, access to medical care and the availability of support services. This absolutely offered me a greater sense of security and of my capacity to cope with violence. This is not to say that I wasn't silenced in some ways, some people around me minimized my story or even blamed me. While abroad and as a non-citizen, I have to put different effort into seeking legal recourse, there is a barrier in services, and it may be harder to find support. This also impacts my sense of security and ability to cope harassment and sexual violence. While abroad, some fellow expats and some nationals have also minimized my story - some tried to tell me that I misunderstood a 'cultural difference' and others, instead of hearing my story, rushed to tell me that they had experienced the same or worse in the U.S.

We often think of sexual violence in very narrow terms, sometimes calling it a "women's issue" or failing to be inclusive of all voices. Rape and Sexual violence in the United States and other countries is not only violence against women, but also racial and gendered violence (other examples are terribly abundant but violence on reservations and against transwomen are two that I wanted to highlight here). Although I am mostly white and white-passing (rather, I glow in the dark), I have also experienced sexual violence accompanied by cues related to my race such as racial slurs or references specific to my nationality. I don't mention this in an attempt to equate this and other deployments of racism in sexual violence, but I point this out because it exists and it happens.

I hear often from Korean and Korean-American women who grew up, travelled to or lived in the United States about the fetish sexualization of their bodies as 'exotic' and the accompanying harassment from American men. We saw evidence of many of these stereotypes recently in the Asian Girlz song and music video, but the very real sexual violence and slut shaming of Asian and Asian-American women is generally overlooked in the United States. Thus, I feel that in sharing experiences of sexual violence that occurred in Korea, I simultaneously need to hear and challenge sexual violence in the United States. I am concerned that attention to sexual violence against white women, while absolutely important to our dialog, can get tied up in media and individual-level racism if we place one-sided emphasis on certain societies as perpetrators and certain survivors' voices.

Support for Survivors 

THE kinds of legal recourse or emotional support facilities we might be able to utilize at home may not be present or visible enough for migrating women. Expats do not always have the same rights or access to rights in a society. For example, recently for employment and visa-related reasons three women I know were in effect discouraged by police from making reports or pressing charges against an assailant. By having a pending case, they feared their employers would drop them in a few months when contract renewals are up, and without an employment contract they would lose their legal visa status. The police reminded them one that they may have legal trouble that lasts longer than their visa eligibility and that it could be inconvenient to be summoned back to Korea for the case. This in turn evoked fear about finding translators or a lawyer to help with the case, about their sexual assault being publicized in the workplace, at school or among their social circle, about recovering the huge ($10,000) security deposit they made for their apartment lease if they lost the visa status and had to leave earlier than anticipated, etc. etc. etc. Some of these concerns are unique pressures tied to living abroad. Other stigmatization and slut-shaming might be tied to race or nationality, I am so tired of hearing that Sex and the City is representative of Western women and their sexual promiscuity.

THE rape of women that are migrating or transiting through countries is especially under-reported in the US, and in many places there are inadequate facilities for support, medical treatment or legal aid for migrating women (see Tiffany Kim's research with Latina migrants in the U.S.). In other regions important NGOs and state actors have stepped up to extend that support to non-nationals.

EVEN when there are legal or social support facilities operated by a state, they may be problematic and migrating women might not want to use them. Interviews of those who use facilities for migrant women show some criticism of the services (see Grace Cheng & Joan Yoo's research with marriage migrants women in Korea). Compared with familiar facilities available in one's home nation, language and legalese might make a sexual assault survivor abroad feel less empowered to act. Documents might not be translated in a language one is comfortable with. Women might perceive that the Multicultural Centers and Migrant Women’s Shelter are tied up in a problematically racialized “Multicultural Policy" that exerts pressure on non-citizen women in a variety of ways or with national pride/image in mind. Therefore, these spaces may be uncomfortable for some women and impact their perception of safety of of their rights.

RECENTLY in South Korea we have observed that expat women are building their own spaces to provide support for sexual assault survivors. Perhaps this could be because the existing spaces fail in some way to meet their needs. Groups such as Stand Up to Sexism, JeollaSafety Alliance, Hollaback! Korea, and Disruptive Voices bring together community members to discuss sexual violence, prevention and awareness.

Violence Against Women Abroad

I appreciate and respect RoseChasm for sharing her story of sexual harassment and for highlighting the problematic institutional response to her PTSD and to survivors who participated in a university study abroad program. Survivors of sexual violence challenge our system with their stories and call for solidarity and awareness about sexual crimes.

TOO many of our international and personal responses to violence against women incorrectly emphasize women’s migration itself as the problem, when we need to challenge societies the world over to change attitudes toward women.

OUR international regime to address human trafficking grounds itself in migration policy and links to organized crime, thus far too many nations respond by restricting the ‘illegal’ movement of women instead of addressing employment structures in origin countries and inadequate legal and social protections for women in destination states (see Vidyamali Samarasinghe's research on trafficking policy).

IN Korea, the state Multicultural Policy singles out domestic violence in international marriages to justify increasing state intervention into the ‘multicultural family’ and hysterize divorce, without acknowledging that Korean families in similar socio-economic conditions have comparable violence and divorce rates. One reason may be that foreign women are perceived as the most easily mobilized resource to solve the various family crises and care-work burden facing Korean society (see Hyun Mee Kim's research on Multicultural Family Policy).

IN the U.S. this iReport could be an opportunity to articulate how privilege operates differently in the U.S. as a white woman, (with some presumed) economic or educational privilege, and based on citizenship. RoseChasm talks about the preparation to go abroad - I think other organizations also try to 'prepare' (particularly) white women for what will happen when they go abroad and are not ‘protected’ by certain racialized and gendered social and legal structures that in the US tend to emphasize their rights or voices as sexual assault survivors when women of color or migrating women might be ignored or more actively silenced by the same social or legal structure in the US.

Advising Women to ‘Protect Themselves’

I have participated in a number of programs abroad, interviewed for other abroad programs, and myself managed or been in charge of orientation for abroad program participants. I have been the recipient of and the provider of advice to women and men in navigating personal safety and acclimating to differing positions of privilege while abroad. I have heard, internalized and offered advice similar to what RoseChasm reports,

“I was prepared to follow the University of Chicago’s advice to women, to dress conservatively, to not smile in the streets.”

Similarly, I was advised extensively about what not to wear as a woman, how (not) to drink, advised not to participate in later ‘rounds’ of outings with co-workers, etc. I was told as a newly arriving woman in Korea that if I entered a motel and was raped, the police would not believe me. I was warned that entering a motel would be seen as consent to whatever ensued thereafter. I was told stories of women who came before me and experienced ‘problems’ or ‘cultural misunderstandings.’ This advice came both from fellow Americans and from Korean staff overseeing programs. There was not a lot of discussion about how to respond to sexual harassment or violence.

I felt deeply uncomfortable with this advice, and when it was my turn to serve in temporary short-term capacities offering advice and reflection to Americans abroad, I parroted the stories but thought that I was framing them with my own view that it is never the victim’s fault. I told women it was not their fault if they were sexually harassed but that advice was offered as how to try to behave in order to possibly avoid some of it. I shared my own experiences of navigating street harassment, but tried to emphasize that my response is not THE response and that these are individual choices, I offered up stories of other friends. I told GLBT members that it was their choice to be out or come out, but offered up stories of what friends who had (selectively) or hadn’t experienced, and talked about the stigmatization I had seen in media about homosexuality. I felt that what I was saying was not good enough because I felt it was important to challenge the root of the problem, which was violence directed at people based on their gender and sexuality.

Inadequate Institutional Responses to Violence Against Women

WE see again and again that institutions such as Peacekeepers, Peace Corps, U.S. Department of State Fulbright Grant, study abroad programs and others, may not take adequate measures to support members who are assaulted, to listen to stories of violence and initiate policy change, to push for legal rights or social support for participants, to take care of their members who are abused. Institutional accountability needs to be more clearly articulated and this dialog is important.

PERHAPS a part of the problem may be that some people overseeing these programs do not personally experience the violence, or because of their own gender/race/sexual orientation/class*/educational*/citizenship status* lack an awareness of how these privileges might operate and affect the safety of program participants, or deny that sufficient 'proof' of violence exists. It is flawed to say that we care about the safety of our program participants, simplistically advise them to ‘be’ safe, but fail to adequately emphasize their safety to partner organizations or advocate for their safety in our broader work - when we vote, in our mindsets, and with our own participation - in social and legal structures.

WITH only a few months experience in Japan, or with only a year of experience in Korea, I was chosen to help new arrivals with their own process of acclimation. I was not an expert, and even years later my own views are constantly changing and growing based on experience. I am aware that by being selected for these positions by an institution - based on my race/gender/sexual orientation/class/educational background - other voices may not have had the same priority in an program. Institutions may rely too much and too passively on women, people of color and LGBT members to step up and speak out or apply for the kinds of leadership programs that I sought, but these same institutions should be accountable for caring about safety, questioning conceptions of safety from diverse perspectives, seeking out knowledge and sharing it. It is not enough to passively welcome women, people of color and LGBT members to speak, rather institutions needs to take a more active role in learning and incorporating diverse concerns in their safety programming. Thoughtful safety policies require careful consideration of gender, race, sexual orientation, citizenship status, etc.

Poor Media Responses to Violence Against Women

AGAIN and again we see troubling coverage of violence against women in the media. I am particularly disappointed that CNN iReports updated the story in the days after it was published to add a “producer note” BEFORE the text by RoseChasm. I took a look at a dozen other iReports and while most had an ‘Editor’s note’ that provided background info/credentials about the writer or summarized a related new story, NONE directly or indirectly questioned the iReporter's motive for sharing their report or offered a lengthy quote by an opposing viewpoint or institution.

The “CNN Producer Note” quoted below in effect minimizes much of RoseChasm’s story, seems to question her motives for sharing the story, and prioritizes the words of the University of Chicago staff and professor who manage the study abroad program [emphasis mine –CBM]:

“CNN PRODUCER NOTE     Please note that CNN cannot independently verify the events described in this post [This is the fundamental premise of the CNN iReport system, isn’t it? The reports are not made by CNN staff, but by people on the ground. Yet, by writing this, CNN seems to cast doubt or distance themselves from this iReport –CBM]. RoseChasm says [Was her iReport in doubt? –CBM] she shared her account of studying abroad in India and experiencing repeated sexual harassment in hopes of spreading 'international exposure about what women travelers and residents experience in India.' [Why do her motives need context? None of the other iReports I have read question the motive of the iReporter –CBM] The University of Chicago issued the following statement [Why does the UofC statement come BEFORE her report? –CBM]:

'Nothing is more important to us at the University of Chicago than caring for the safety and well-being of our students [And apparently they or CNN care quite a lot about making sure that UofC gets this statement out there in cases when a student shares about threats to their safety BEFORE we even read the story about sexual harassment –CBM], here in Chicago and wherever they go around the world in the course of their studies. The University offers extensive support and advice to students before, during and after their trips abroad [Be specific: How extensive and how useful? –CBM], and we are constantly assessing and updating that preparation in light of events and our students' experiences [Be more specific: How will it changed based on this report? What has the institution learned from this story? –CBM]. We also place extremely high value on the knowledge our students seek by traveling and studying other civilizations and cultures, and we are committed to ensuring they can do so in safety while enriching their intellectual lives.' Dipesh Chakrabarty, a University of Chicago professor who was in India for the first three weeks of the session, told CNN that he was unaware of RoseChasm’s situation [Then why is he being asked to comment on this ireport BEFORE we read RoseChasm’s story? –CBM]. He noted, though, that the university tries to prepare students for what they might encounter while abroad.'Both faculty and staff in Chicago and our local Indian staff counsel students before and during the trip about precautions they need to take in a place like India,' Chakrabarty said in an e-mail. 'Ensuring student safety and well-being is the top priority of both the College and staff and faculty associated with the program.''Every year about 25 students enroll in it and several have gone on to become India-specialists by doing PhDs on the country and its past and present. This is the first time that I personally have come across such a serious problem,' he said. You can read more about this story on CNN.com.

- katie, CNN iReport producer” 

*I think that class, educational background and citizenship status are important to discussions of migration and sexual violence. Processes of migration are heavily impacted by these statuses.  

Dangerous Man of Korea Fundraiser Ends in Death

Here at Korean Gender Café we have written about Man of Korea here, here and here.

Today I am troubled to hear that the group’s leader, Sung Jae-gi, issued a fundraising statement tied to a threat to commit suicide if he did not raise all of the funds to support his failing organization. We sincerely hope he is healthy and safe, but recent reports indicate that the search is still on.

Why did the leader of Man of Korea go to such lengths to fundraise?

In the donation appeal below, Man of Korea claims that since the 1980s all of the laws, policies and institutions have accomplished gender equality. The appeal for funding argues that women are no longer socially weak in light of various changes (such as female president, ROTC, college entrance rates, and that they claim that the women’s employment rate is ahead of men’s, etc.). The appeal argues that we only discuss women’s stories in society. It asks for donations to support Man of Korea.

There are two tragedies here. First, that Sung Jae-gi is missing or may be injured. If he is well and safe, he has no doubt caused a great deal of concern to those that care for him and mobilized the police and other facilities to the search. I worry for his safety and hope that this dangerous fundraising ploy doesn’t cost him his life or health.

The second tragedy is that a fundamental unwillingness to cooperate and engage in honest dialog that has fueled major misconceptions between Man of Korea and other groups, such as the Ministry of Gender and Family. Fervor is whipped up and ideological passions flare and lead to extreme measures such as this dangerous fundraiser. We hope that his fans and Man of Korea members will not follow this suicidal example and instead can engage in serious conversations to address problems in society.

According to Yonhap News, Sung Jae-gi has not been seen since his jump and

“Photographssoon appeared on Sung's Twitter showing him holding onto the outer side of thebridge, ready to jump. The photos also showed three other men holding camerasand camcorders. One of them appeared to be a camera crew member from abroadcaster.”

A Twitter userposted the following edited image of Sung Jae-gi possibly preparing for his jump:

I hope no one ever threatens their life for a fundraiser. In doing so, what machine is Man of Korea raging against?

July 31, 2013 Update: Man of Korea / Men's Alliance leader Sung Jae-gi has been recovered from the Han River, after a publicity stunt gone tragically wrong. His funeral will be held August 1 in Daegu. 

Yoon is NOT in a 'sex scandal'

South Korea is not humiliated by a 'sex scandal.'
South Korean English dailies and reports are calling the recent accusation of buttocks grabbing by Yoon a sex 'scandal' but doing so overlooks the fact that this was not consentual sexual contact. It is important to distinguish sexual assaults from sex scandals.
Here is a great media education tool by The Chicago Taskforce on Violence Against Children and Young Women which discusses the damaging misuse of the term sex scandal.
In particular, the term sex scandal diminishes the seriousness of the crime.
According to Yonhap News, "Yoon, 56, was accused of grabbing the buttocks of his temporarily hired secretary" and did so "without her permission." He was also accused of "presenting himself naked to her."
The consentual sex in the Shanghai diplonatic mission might be called a sex scandal. The Villa bribery case might be called a sex scandal (although some reports indicate there was blackmail involved).
The pending case in which Yoon is accused of indecent exposure and grabbing an intern's buttocks, is not a sex scandal.

Park Geun-Hye & Fashion: Still HATE this Double Standard

Thanks to the media for ongoing and questionable criticism of Park Geun-hye's [fashion] decisions. 

Jung Kyung-min, New York correspondent of the JoongAng Ilbo, adds to the short list of fashion-focused coverage of Park Geun-Hye that I find questionable, but Jung takes it to a new and offensive level today in Joonang Daily's 'Wardrobe change may be due for Park.' 

After a lengthy description of all of the great things Michelle Obama has done for American fashion, the piece transitions to an incredibly offensive comparison and criticism of Park Geun-hye [with running commentary my own]:

"South Korea’s President-elect Park Geun-hye may wish to make fashion statements just as Michelle Obama has with her impressive style. The next president favors an up-do hairstyle reminiscent of her mother, Yuk Young-soo and pantsuits. Her decades-old fashion reflects her adherence to principles and self-control. However, unlike Michelle Obama, she has made it a strict secret what brands she wears.

She may have wanted to avoid unnecessary attention to her fashion when she was an opposition politician. As president, however, her fashion has a different meaning. She will be the face of the country, and her fashion will receive international attention."

[IF Park wishes to do so, she will on her own terms, without snarky criticisms like this article that rips on her style for being out-dated and boring. Maybe it is a secret because she wants people to discuss her POLICIES and not her fashion palette,or for any number of other reasons not to conflate politics and branding. Did past presidents announce their brand choices? I guess I missed that memo from Lee Myung-Bak.]

"It would be hard to find a better way to promote and advertise Korean fashion."

[Really? I don't think it would be hard to think of better ways to promote and advertise Korean fashion.

But first, is it reasonable to set this as a goal? Is this the job of a politician? Michelle Obama was already renowned for her fashion statements years ago, so why didn't the Joongang Daily or Korea Herald (see my previous post at 'Park Geun-Hye & Skirts: HATE this Double Standard') call upon Lee Myung-Bak to take his style up a notch and promote Korean brands?

Second, if promoting Korean fashion is a top priority, we can question whether or not the President-Elect's personal style is among the best ways to promote the industry. Why wouldn't Korean designers, or even celebrities (ex. 2NE1) that are already internationally famous as style icons perhaps be "better" for promotion and advertising? In addition, the Korean government has invested quite a bit of money in Korean fashion branding, hosting fashion events domestically and abroad to highlight designers and Korean style.]

"It would be thrilling to see a female president wearing accessories, shoes, bags and outfits from young Korean designers and domestic brands at meetings with foreign heads of state."

[MY EDITORIAL REVISION: It would be thrilling to see a female president wearing accessories, shoes, bags and outfits from young Korean designers and domestic brands at meetings with foreign heads of state.]

"I am already curious what Park will be wearing on her inaugural ceremony."

[I am really curious as to why this article pitch was picked up.]

QUIZ: Anyone know what President Lee, Bush or Obama are wearing in ANY of these pictures? Anybody care? I don’t, either.