Gender, Sex and Politics in Korea: What the Saenuri Party really meant by "Prepared Woman President"

The Park Administration response to the Sewol sinking was absolutely inadequate. Protests and hunger strikes to demand accountability and preventative measures continue to grow five months after over 300 people, mostly students on a field trip, lost their lives.

A family assembles to demand a "safe world for my son."

Apparently some politicians demanding a transparent report on the Presidents' response have been gossiping and speculating on her sex life. Opposition lawmaker Sul Hoon referenced (and dismissed) rumors that President Park was engaging in a "tryst" during a 7 hour period during the tragic Sewol sinking.

President Park participates in mourning the deceased. 

“What did [President Park] do for those seven hours at the Blue House?” Sul asked. “I don’t think it’s true what people are saying about her having a tryst. I think that’s probably not it.”

The resulting political controversy has centered on demands that Sul resign and whether his words were intended to malign the President or to dismiss the rumors. Lost in this discussion is the sexism that the majority party is also leveling at President Park.

While Sul's accounting of the rumors demonstrate a sexist tendency to focus on the unmarried female President's leadership, they also highlight a sense of betrayal and mistrust. The gossip centers on what might have kept the President preoccupied specifically for the 7 hour period during the Sewol sinking.

On the other hand, Saenuri party spokesperson Park Dae-chul's statement blurs President Park's public office and private sex life, and are not limited to a discussion of the Sewol sinking, but extend to a general comment about women's sexuality:

“It’s troubling to think what might happen if there are rumors about ‘the President of the Republic of Korea having a tryst’ going around,” Park added. “The Saenuri Party intends to examine a possible complaint against Sul Hoon to the National Assembly Ethics Committee.”

What might happen?

By emphasizing the "Republic of Korea" in his statement, perhaps spokesman Park calls upon tried and tested fear of Korean womens' bodies and sexuality and the national image. He asks, how might Korea look to other nations?

Is the Saenuri Party particularly sensitive to North Korea state media describing President Park as a "crafty prostitute" in thrall to her "pimp" Barack Obama?" Or is Saenuri still unclear what they meant by the election campaign slogan "Prepared Woman President?" The party cultivates an image of a woman's body and sexuality sacrificed as the "mother of the Korean state" and in control in contrast to the womens' bodies the state aggressively polices and regulates.  

Campaign Slogan: Prepared Woman President

Sources:
Hankyoreh, Opposition lawmaker causes firestorm by referring to president’s “tryst”
Posted on : Sep.13,2014 14:15 KST  http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/655017.html

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."  

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.

You Look Like a Woman, Stop It

Guest blogger Tamara Gater adds a voice to our discussion of the Korea Times 'Fashionista' piece with this comparison to their coverage of sports broadcasters "Are sports shows going too far?" Read more from Tamara here. 

Un-Dress to Impress

Ladies, ever feel like no one is listening to you? As if though what you’re saying is going in one ear and out the other? Is your skirt below the knee? Shirt buttoned all the way up? Yeah. See there’s your problem right there.

Don’t despair. You’re not alone. Even the fashionistas[1] amongst us get it wrong; like our female president Park Geun Hye [PGH] for example. Recently, the Korea Times, has been giving PGH a bit of a hard time over her wardrobe choices. The newspaper points out that her outfits are a clear indication of her emotional state which can be described as “enraged” and “resentful”. Naturally, it is risky to have a commander in chief who wears her heart on her sleeve. Just think what would have happened if Kim Jung Un happened to see an image of PGH on the day she so foolishly decided to wear her camouflage green jacket? He could have easily interpreted her ‘enraged’ ensemble as a threat and nuked us in preemptive defense.

Luckily though, days later Park was spotted wearing a white coat, in what can only be understood to symbolize Picasso’s dove of peace and so a nuclear crisis was averted. However the fact remains - all of this could have been easily avoided if only PGH wasn’t so hell bent on being “solemn” and “dignified”. The Korea Times tried to give PGH a gentle push in the right direction with a subtle hint that "now, the first Korean woman head of state is changing her style but not baring more.[2]" And why in the name of national security is she not? What’s so wrong with giving the people what they want and showing a bit of leg?

At least some women out there are getting it right though, as the Korea Times are quick to point out (always ahead of the curve they are).  Meet the female sports broadcasters on the network channels. Bet these women have never had to repeat a sentence in their lives. Their audience is all ears:

 “I am convinced that it is good to watch a sports show hosted by beautiful and sexy women. What’s more interesting is that I started to care about sports that I really did not care about before watching the show,” Oh said.[3]

Sure it’s possible to ask whether it’s Mr Oh’s interest in sports or his attraction to the sports presenter that spiked. But that would be cynical. What’s the colour for resentful again?

So it’s time to own up, ladies. We got it wrong. Ever since the day when you put on a crisp white blouse and an Aline black skirt for your first job interview, you have been living a fashion lie. An urban legend that says dare you not confuse your male colleagues with any of the following: bare skin (how’s anyone meant to look you in the eye when your shoulder is staring at them?), bright colours (black means you have a degree/ pink means you have lady parts) and above the knee lengths (are you here to meet a deadline or a future husband?) You’ve faithfully abstained because every sensible woman knows that your male colleagues will not appreciate it, what’s more – they will not respect you. Show up to work looking like a woman and guess what? You’ll get treated like one. Is that what you really want?

Well apparently – yes. I know I know. I am confused too. But the evidence presented by the Korea Times is undisputable – it’s not what you say, it’s what you’re wearing when you say it.

The advocates of the sexy and beautiful broadcasters, who the Korea Times explains are “self-proclaimed “master” of adult videos”[4] enjoy the sports shows because it gives them an adrenaline rush distinctly different from “such videos” which are understood to mean pornography. And suddenly with those words, the sports shows become an alternative to porn and the sports presenters …well definitely not the PGH of this world.

The opponents of the sexy broadcaster ladies only confirm this point of view by declaring that

“they [the presenters] can show off their beauty in other preferable ways; not by revealing their bodies. I think it is their obligation to keep their dignity as a presenter and not become a feast for men’s eyes…If some of them want to wear such revealing dresses, rather than being identified as a spokeswoman of public opinion, I think they do not deserve the title of presenter”[5]

Ah dignity! There it is again. So before you run off to the seamstress to have all your dresses hemmed in and taken up, word of caution. Once you go (little) black (dress), you can’t go back. You are either somber and dignified PGH or sexy and beautiful broadcaster. Choose one and choose wisely because according to the Korea Times, woman only gets to be one or the other, never both.

Or you could write your own story.

---

[1] The Korea Times, Park the Fashionista, 26 April 2013, http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2013/04/116_134686.html

[2] The Korea Times, Park the Fashionista, 26 April 2013, ttp://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2013/04/116_134686.html

[3] The Korea Times, Are sports shows going too far?’, 23 April 2013,  http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/culture/2013/04/135_134471.html

[4] Oh, a self-proclaimed “master” of adult videos, said he felt an adrenalin rush different to what he experiences from such videos when watching the sports round-up. “The announcers in such shows are not explicit, but sexy, and at the same time they are active and elegant,” The Korea Times, “Are sports shows going too far?’, 23 April 2013, http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/culture/2013/04/135_134471.html

[5] Please note that in the article, the speaker Choi is identified as a woman,  which would cement an all too obvious of a stereotype promulgating that it’s the men who in support of these adult video cum sports shows whilst the women are the moral bearers of society banning these female presenters from the public view, The Korea Times, “Are sports shows going too far?’, 23 April 2013, http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/culture/2013/04/135_134471.html

Korea Times 'Fashionista' piece on Park's 'enraged' and 'resentful' color palette

In Park the fashionista the Korea Times joins other news outlets in ascribing emotional significance to President Park Geun-hye's color palette. This is the SECOND time this quarter that the Korea Times felt Park's fashion was newsworthy, please see our first post at "Park Geun-Hye & Skirts: HATE this Double Standard." Korean Gender Café also discussed, analyzed and critiqued this trend in previous posts: Part 2 "Still HATE this Double Standard," and Part 3 "A Late-comer to the Race to Ascribe Stereotypes to the President."

Quite unfortunately, with each new iteration, this "news" trend grows more offensive. This latest article ramps up the sexist rhetoric by characterizing Park's fashion choices as indicative of her 'enraged' and 'resentful' attitude. These are word choices frequently ascribed to sexist depiction of women political leaders and their use here in the context of fashion adds to the gendered rhetoric describing President Park. Article quotation and our running commentary below:

PGH Still President in Any Color

"Now, the first Korean woman head of state is changing her style but not baring more." [CBM: Is it necessary to discuss womens' fashion in terms of bared skin, or is this alluding to the recent ban on 'indecent exposure' that went viral a few weeks ago?]

"When Park met leaders of the governing and opposition parties just after the atomic test, she was dressed in a grey jacket with black lapel and looked solemn.

Park wore a dark-green outfit on March 4 when she issued a statement to urge the National Assembly to promptly pass the government reorganization bill so she would able to complete her Cabinet.

She was enraged back then because her nominee for the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning - former Bell Labs head Kim Jeong-hoon - stepped down a day earlier because of the parliamentary impasse. [CBM: Enraged is a quite objectionable word choice to describe a political leader because of the emotional and unhinged tone. Though, to be balanced we also find that South Korean media has criticized "Lee Myung-bak’s angry outbursts."]



As Park highly regarded Kim as the perfect fit to lead the science ministry, which she thinks is most important to achieve her goal of a “creative economy,” she strongly expressed her frustration and resentment [CBM: Again, pointing to resentment draws on gendered tropes that for so long have characterized women as "resentful" and threatening to patriarchal power]."

We have never read that a male politician expresses his inner rage and resentment through fashion choices or a color palette. This media coverage obviously fails the Name it Change it reversibility test and reveals a sexist tone. Journalists shouldn’t describe her clothes unless they would describe a male politicians. "If media coverage doesn’t mention a male candidate’s eye color, haircut, makeup, marital status, children or lack thereof—then it shouldn’t mention those things about a female candidate. When it does mention these things about a female candidate, it hurts her [politically]. That's why it's so important to respond."

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. 

Testing Park's 'psychological symptoms'

The Hankyoreh ran a cartoon on 2013.01.18 which they have since translated into English, but without completely describing the text. The cartoon depicts a psychology test like those popularized in magazines. Below is the cartoon as presented by the newspaper:

A test of Park’s psychology

Here is the Hankyoreh's translation/explanation of the cartoon in English:

President-elect Park Geun-hye stands on a square that represents her election campaign pledges to expand welfare. Park is now at a crossroads and will need to decide her next step. The men on the left represent the conservative media and politicians who are urging Park to trim back the generous welfare promises she made, saying that the budget for the measures can’t be found. The square to Park’s left represents keeping the promises regardless of the difficulties, which is the type of politician that she is trying to present herself as. (by Jang Bong-goon)

However, the English translation provided doesn't capture the full criticism represented by the 해석 / psychological test interpretation written upside down at the bottom of the cartoon. This text roughly states (my imperfect translation):

If Park modifies pledges, she is instructed as follows:Your symptoms to avoid: having an earnest heart of gold.

The cartoon implies that either Park is dishonest and lacks goodness, or that she does the right  (difficult) thing and is authentically representing herself as President-elect. 

What do you think about Korea's social welfare system? About Park Geun-hye's pledges and the feasibility of proposed policies? 

Park Geun-Hye & Skirts: HATE this Double Standard

The Korea Times ran a piece "Skirt on inaugural day" yesterday, discussing what outfit President-elect Park Geun-hye should wear to her Feb. 25, 2013 inauguration. In the piece, Rachel Lee summarizes fashion tips from experts that “have come forth with suggestions on how to navigate the complex relationship between power and clothes.”

Since when is there a COMPLEX relationship between power and clothes? Who cares about this?  Earlier this year when U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton was scrutinized for her fashion and cosmetic choices, Celinda Lake pointed out that:

“evaluation of women on their looks is driven by news media, not voters. "What is just absolutely amazing is how pervasive this is and how true it is even for women reporters and the degree to which even if women try to develop just a uniform for the job we can't seem to get off this topic," she says. In focus groups, "I haven't heard anyone mention her hair or her makeup for probably a decade. It's not the voters driving this at all. They could care less. It is reporters. It is both male and female reporters."

I wonder whether the average Korean citizen cares whether Park wears a skirt in the right color on Feb. 25, 2013? 

Thank you so very much, Korea Times, for telling us that “the president-elect, with her power suits and coiffed hair, portrays an image of veteran politician with aplomb in the male-dominated political arena.” I suppose this shouldn’t be too surprising given the Saenuridang slogan ‘Prepared Woman President” while critics have said she is a female political leader "only in biological terms" because "for the past 15 years, Park has shown little visible effort to help women in politics or anywhere else as a policymaker." This dialog about Park's performance of gender, criticism of her femininity and womanhood - all of this seems to create a mold and expected role for women in politics. Supporters and critics alike narrow-mindedly link gender and politics as if genitalia pre-disposed one to a policy agenda. 

I guess we couldn’t look to her long years of political office-holding to see that she is a veteran, her successful election, or her prominence within her party to see her confidence or aplomb as a politician… no we had better take a look at her fashion and hair style… or maybe we can do a little better and stop imposing an absurd double-standard on woman politicians.

Image credit: http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2012/12/20/1226541/173327-south-korea-park-geun-hye.jpg