Women-Only Spaces & Allegations of Reverse Sexism

The Korea Times ran “'Male-free' zones ignite uproar: Some question the legitimacy of woman-only areas” by Park Jin-hai, Kwon Ji-youn, and Yoon Sung-won.

I have never once seen a space in Korea designated 'male-free.' I have seen a few women-only seats and lounges, but even these are rare. The reason Park, Kwon and Yoon flip the script from (still rarely used) 'woman-only' to 'male-free' is to call attention to their perception of reverse discrimination. The article contains a few half-hearted attempts to say that sometimes maybe possibly spaces reserved for women to prevent sexual harassment could maybe possibly sometimes be sort of important to public safety -- BUT really asks 'what about men's rights?' The purpose of the piece is to assert that men’s rights are being denied and that women-only spaces are reverse discriminatory. Park, Kwon and Yoon even go so far as to try to convince us that by pursuing public safety we are unwittingly putting the status of women in jeopardy[1].

That kind of rhetorical game was probably deployed to mitigate the way that the authors disregard evidence of sexual violence, or to  try to show a paternialistic concern for the status of women, or maybe to presume to understand the needs of women and convince women that such spaces are somehow not in their best interests -- but I'm not buying what you're selling.

The authors claim that

“All people agree to some extent that women including those with children should be provided with special care. But as some of the measures put in place include absurd directives it has triggered “reverse discrimination” against men and thus worsened confrontations between members of the opposite sex.”

I argue that it is not just providing for women-only space that cause conflict, but that the larger issue is a lack of public education explaining why such measures are necessary. More importantly, c'mon, sexual harassment itself is already a huge glaring pattern of 'confrontation between members of the opposite sex' that these spaces are designed to address. From a woman's perspective, let me tell you, if I were to weigh the 'confrontation' of sexual violence and harassment with the 'confrontation' of engaging in a dialog with a man explaining why women-only spaces are important, I KNOW which one is the WORSE 'confrontation.'

Reading closely, in the interviews shared in the article, the most-repeated statement by an interviewee is a variation of "I don't understand..." The authors also seem to either lack an understanding of why some spaces were reserved only for women, or they failed to investigate and report the reason in this article. I do think that campaigns that simply label a space ‘women only’ without providing an explanation could cause confusion and misunderstanding.More importantly, inadequately explained policies or labels are a major missed opportunity for public education about sexual violence, privilege and the importance of measures to promote safety.

The authors go on to cite women’s lounges at schools and law firms,

“there are special pink buses exclusively for female passengers. “The idea of having a safe bus ride is good. But having a bus which men are banned from, is tantamount to criminalizing all men and viewing them as potential sex criminals,” said Kang Hyun-chul. “It reminds me of the old-time black-white segregation of the South Africa. It is very insulting.”

*I am not an artist, but you get the point~

Park, Yoon and Kwon describe the activism of members of Ilbe and Man of Korea/남성연대 who snap pictures of women-only spaces for online discussion and offline complaint. Of course Ilbe and Man of Korea/남성연대 members can rush to claim reverse sexism by snapping a pic of the 'women's seat' at the library, because they don't know about or understand that there have been safety problems at the library. These self-proclaimed ‘men's rightists’ argue that they are excluded via reverse discrimination, and this may be partially attributed to the fact that they are not educated about the extent of their male privilege in this context. While the ‘men’s rights’ group thinks that they are being excluded from learning spaces at schools and library, their outrage is amplified the rapid gains made in women's educational attainment. At the same time, they do not realize that by being men they are not profiled in public spaces as a target for sexual harassment.

The signage could read something like “in accordance with ### law to prevent sexual harassment, this seat is reserved for women only” or “due to reported incidents of sexual harassment, this seat is reserved for women only” rather than simply saying “women only.” Doing so would immediately highlight our consciousness of harassment and possibly promote survivor reporting and bystander intervention.

The authors conclude,

“The hard facts still suggest that the status of Korean women lags behind those of other countries ― the World Economic Forum’s global gender gap report for 2012 ranked Korea 108th out of 135 countries around the world.
Yet, some of the measures that have been introduced without being given much thought as to their implications only jeopardize the status of women.”

The authors never explain the decision-making process behind making these women-only spaces and the critique that these are randomly designated spaces ignores the crime reports that are the actual basis for making safer women-only designated bus seats, train cars, library seats and lounges. Let’s get real; promoting the safety of women is NOT going to ‘jeopardize their status.’ Rather than internalizing, accepting and tolerating sexual harassment, visibility around sexual harassment teaches women and men to stand up for safe spaces for everyone.

Finally attitudes described by Professor Kwak,

“As more women pursue careers and succeed in these, the traditional viewpoint that regarded women as weak members of society has changed,” said Kwak Geum-ju, psychology a professor at Seoul National University. “Consequently, some males now go as far as to perceive women as competitors, exacerbating confrontations between the two sexes.”

demonstrate that we need to fill an education gap. We need to make sure that men and women understand these initiatives in the context of public safety, and do not mislabel them as competitive advantages for women. It isn’t about giving women a leg-up in the workplace; it is about preventing the sometimes debilitating effects of sexual violence so that women can safely access education.

Without appropriate public education campaigns to spread awareness, misunderstanding and backlash grow. Efforts to create safe spaces are overturned and women and social minority voices are effectively being silenced by backlash against human rights campaign progress. So let’s spread the word ourselves and help the public understand the reason that these projects exist. Let’s share information about sex crimes, let’s track where they happen, let’s stand up and intervene when we see sexual harassment, and let’s give public education to those who compare the pink car on a subway train to apartheid in South Africa.

This December a new public education project to promote awareness and reporting of street harassment will launch nationwide in Korea. Korean Gender Café 한국 젠더 카페 will soon post updates for those interested in this evolving project.

--
We'd like to highlight a few examples of our public awareness promotion around sexual violence, please see:

Sexual Assault and Harassment, Child Self-defense, Domestic Violence Shelter Volunteer
Seoul Rape Medical Treatment and National Police Hospital (Located on Line 3, exit 1)
What is quasi-rape? Is Park Si-hoo charged with rape?
Queer Corner: Imbalance of Power and Rape in the Korean Gay Community
Sexual Violence as a Migrating Woman, Re: India Story You Never Wanted to Hear
Queer Corner: Violence in a Label - 마짜, 때짜, 올
가정폭력 Domestic Violence Awareness : Music & Media

For another discussion on reverse sexism please see So-called "Reverse Sexism" in Korea 소위 ‘역차별’

For background on Ilbe and Man of Korea/남성연대 see our posts
What is "Men’s Korea" (formerly Boslachi)? 맨즈코리아 ('보슬아치' 사이트), 그들은 누구인가?
What is Man of Korea? ‘남성연대’, 그들은 누구인가?
Korean Male Union & Sexual Harassment 남성연대와 성희롱
Dangerous Man of Korea Fundraiser Ends in Death
‘남성연대’, 페미니즘 그리고 여성가족부의 대안 “Korean Male Union”, Feminism and Korean Ministry of Gender Equality and Family

This is the 70th post on the Korean Gender Café 한국 젠더 카페! *^^*

---

[1] There are cases where public safety initiatives HAVE put women’s status and safety in jeopardy. For example, I urge Park, Kwon and Yoon to do some reading about refugee camps and peacekeeping operations under investigation where women were segregated and forced to trade sex for resources, were raped by peacekeepers, or were raped while searching for resources due to poor facilities for displaced persons. The pink car on the subway is NOT such an instance.

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. 

So-called "Reverse Sexism" in Korea 소위 ‘역차별’

**

In this post I want to discuss the claims of “reverse sexism” or victimization of men made by two blogs in response to recent Korean laws designed to prevent sexual abuse or promote gender equality. This is not to say that men cannot be abused, but according to groups like Man of Korea (남성연대described here) and the site formerly known as Boslachi (보슬아치 사이트) which is now called Men’s Korea (맨즈코리아 described here) Korean men suffer from “reverse discrimination” based on gender as a result of these and other laws. The argument stems from the establishment of ministries and laws to rectify historic gender discrimination, prevent sexual violence, and address social and political inequalities that subordinated women's human rights. Last November, Eri Kim wrote a powerful piece rebutting the supposed “over-empowerment”of women in Korean society. Eri Kim asks, why a group of men keep referring toprograms for women’s rights as “reverse sexism.” I don't think that designing such policies is 'reverse discrimination' against men because: 1) they do not strip men of their human rights, but rather enforce women's human rights, 2) they are enacted to bring about gender equality, 3) 'reverse' implies that men do not enjoy social and political privileges, but they still do (please see The Grand Narrative for a discussion on women's workforce participation here and here for starters), 4) this is a much weaker argument, but the vast majority of politicians and judges presiding over Korean law are men, and finally 5) women do not occupy a hierarchically superior position to structurally discriminate against men in the way that women have been recipients of discrimination in the past. 

여기서  소위 ‘역차별’과 남성들의 성폭력예방법의‘피해자’라는 인식에 대해 얘기하고싶다. 지난 11월에 김에리씨의 기사가 인상적인 이야기로 남성연대나 보슬아치사이트의 ‘소위 여성들이 월권행위를 한다는인식을 잘 반박했다. 김에리가 “왜 유독 일부 한국 남성들은 이 같은 상황에서도 ‘역차별’ 생떼를 쓰는 것일까”냐고 했다.

The first issue I would like to discuss is the Korea Men’s Union’s attitude toward the regulation of the sex industry (I previouslyposted about their attitude toward sexual harassment here). The group opposes the current legal regime that attempts to address sex trafficking. Recently the Court system upheld a case protecting the rights of a minor in a coerced sex scenario, under the sex trafficking prevention and youth protection laws. In the September 9, 2010 ruling, the Supreme Court found that:

 “A (male) and B (male) approach a pregnant runaway 16-year-old teen C (female) and tell her that they will help find a way for her to earn enough money for abortion. B then solicits C to take takes naked photo shots and then forces C to sign a contract for sex. In the meantime, A gets arrested for an unrelated crime and is sent to a prison. In addition, B, C, and A’s wife split the money earned by procuring and coercing C to have sex with at least 12 customers. The court rules that even though A was physically absent, he still is guilty because he did not prevent his partner from coercing the teen to have sex or take photos.”

첫째로 남성연대의 성산업의 규제에 대한 인식을 비판하려고 한다. 남성연대가 성매매특별법을 반대하고 있다. 최근에 대법원의 판례중에서는 십대소녀가 성행위를 하도록 강요했던 악덕 포주들을 성매매특별법으로 처벌하여 그 여성의 인권을 보호했다. 대법원 2010.09.09 선고 2010도6924 판결에 따르면,

“갑이 을과 공모하여 가출 청소년 병(여, 16세)에게 낙태수술비를 벌도록 해 주겠다고 유인하였고, 을로 하여금 병의 성매매 홍보용 나체사진을 찍도록 하였으며, 병이 중도에 약속을 어길 경우 민형사상 책임을 진다는 각서를 작성하도록 한 후, 자신이 별건으로 체포되어 구치소에 수감 중인 동안 병이 을의 관리 아래 12회에 걸쳐 불특정 다수 남성의 성매수 행위의 상대방이 된 대가로 받은 돈을 병, 을 및 갑의 처 등이 나누어 사용한 사안에서, 병의 성매매 기간 동안 갑이 수감되어 있었다 하더라도 위 갑은 을과 함께 미성년자유인죄, 구 청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률(2009. 6. 9. 법률 제9765호 아동•청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률로 전부 개정되기 전의 것) 위반죄의 책임을 진다고 한 원심판단을 수긍한 사례.”

The Korea Man Union opposes the laws because they are worried about their personal interest, insofar as they do not want to be criminalized for buying sex. However, they do not express much concern for sex workers human rights and working conditions, nor for the prevention of sex trafficking or for minors trafficked into the sex industry. Although the Law is not perfect (which we discuss here) rather than focusing on so-called ‘men’s rights’ the group should realize they share common interests with women in Korean society. The Korea Man Union should more carefully consider the social and legal conditions for sex workers in Korean society.

남성연대의 성매매특별법을 반대하는 이유는 개인적인 이익을 위한 성구매로 불법 형사처벌를 받고싶지 않기때문이다. 그들은 인신매매된 사람들과 십대소녀들의 인권에대해 별다른 우려를  표명하지 않는다. 성매매특별법은 완벽하진 않지만 ‘소위 남성의 권리’에 주력하지 않고 한국사회에서 남자들과 여성들 사이에 공동 이익을 위하여 함께 도움이 될 수 있는 방향을 지향하는 법이다. 남성연대가 인신매매, 여성인권과 성노동자의 법적인 사회지위에 대하여 더 신중히 문제를 고찰해야한다. 

Secondly, I will discuss ‘everyday sexism’ by some men and women in society. For example, some men  complain about reverse sexism these days but they do not understand what it is to be a woman in society.

둘째, 사회의 ‘일상 성차별’ 에 대해 얘기해보자. 예를 들면 몇몇 남성들은 ‘역차별’에 대해 불평하면서 여성들의 ‘일상 생활에서 겪게 되는 성차별을’ 이해하지 못하는 것 같다.

Sometimes when my close (usually) male friends get upset about the laws designed to prevent sex crimes, they say that are all men are treated as ‘potential criminals’ by the law. I get very frustrated because if those men really want to change society and do something about rape culture (which contributes to the threat and fear of sexual violence), first they might consider carefully voting for sound political platforms and politicians that will pursue policies to end violence, or they should take everyday action to criticize other men's sexist language and discriminatory actions toward women, obviously they themselves must not rape and should learn how to prevent rape (by learning about rape culture, for example), and they should think about gender issues.

주변 남성들에 따르면 그들은 항상 자신들을 예비 성범죄로 보는 시선에  불편하다고 얘기를 하며, 이는 나를 화가 조금 나게 한다. 남성들에 대한 불편한 시선에 사회적 인식변화를 만들려면  우리는 성범죄 혹은 성차별에 대한 올바른 인식을 가진 정치가들을 선출하여 모두가 인정할 수 있는 법을 만들어야한다. 또한 일부 남성들은 그릇된 성의식을 가지고 여성을 비하하거나 성차별하는 행동들을 개선해나가는 노력이 필요하다. 물론 성폭행은 일어나지 말아야한다.  그들은 젠더 이슈에 대해 생각해야 한다고 생각한다.

Finally, due to high incidence of rape, victim-blaming and social acceptance of the conditions that promote or permit rape we can say that Korea has a rape culture (which is criticized by SlutWalk Korea 잡년행동_슬럿워크 here and on Twitter @SlutWalkKorea ). Sometimes when news of a rape or sexual crime comes out these male friends may think that they do not have to bother to care about these issues, instead they complain that they are looked at by women around them as if they are potential sex offenders. But, in that case they should first think about the purpose of the law to protect women and children from crime, and carefully consider the anxiety that women and children experience everyday in society. In addition, if they really want to see a change they should get involved in elections and in demanding a widespread change in our rape culture society. 

결론으로 성폭력을 방관하는 현상은 사회적으로 성폭력행위를 안일하게 생각하는 행위때문이다.어떤 남성들은 뉴스에 나오는 성범죄 사건들이 자신과는 상관없는 일이라고 하며 그 사건에 관심이 없지만 몇몇 남성들을 예비 성범죄자로 보는 시선을 불만느낀다고한다. 하지만 이런 사건들로 인해 불안해 떨고있는 여성들과 어린이들의 입장을 생각한다면 그들을 어떻게 보호해야하는가를 먼저 생각하는게 중요하다고 생각한다. 또한 이러한  문제를 개선하고 싶다면 선거에 참여하여 공정한 의식을 가진 정당을 뽑아  우리 사회의 ‘성폭력 방관현상’의 금지 요구해야한다고 생각한다. 

Court Case Referenced:

대법원 2010.09.09 선고 2010도6924 판결 【사기·청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강요행위등)·청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(청소년이용음란물제작·배포등)·미성년자유인·절도·공문서부정행사】 [공2010하,1960]

*About the image: This image was found as part of a series titled 남녀 역차별 posted on 2009/08/12 by VertiGo. This particular image was captioned 여자가 남자때리면 용감하다 or "If a woman hits a man she is brave."

Korean Male Union & Sexual Harassment 남성연대와 성희롱

 The group Korean Male Union (Man of Korea) has been in the news frequently in the past few months and our regular contributer Jenderole has introduced some of there ideas here, here and here.

In my opinion, Man of Korea may have some important messages to share about fairness in censoring lyrics or content offensive toward men or boys, for example, after the movie "You are my Pet/너는 펫" or the song "Good Boy." They also may provide useful resources to men who suffer sexual harassment on their website.

남성연대가 페미니즘을 비판할때 남성화 이론을 선립하고 있다? 남성연대의 페미니즘 이해한 의식은 무엇인가? 남성연대의 구성원들이 페미니즘을 배우기 대신 압축적 근대성에 대해 생각하며 '세계 최저의 출산율, 최고의 이혼율, 가족의 해체, 한국남성의 가족 부양 경제생활비 부담률 세계 1위, 가족에 대한 한국 남성들의 의무와 책임은 다양화되가고 있으나 가정은 오히려 붕괴되고 있다고 말하고 있으며 이러한 원인'을 다르게 이해할 수 있다.

However, a casual browsing of their site shows a serious lack of understanding about violence against women in Korean society, or even about the purpose of Korean law. In the screen grab below, some members debate about the sexual harassment laws, and the online misogyny is apparent. This quote is representative of a subset of discussion on the site that not infrequently centers on the supposed oppression of men brought about by feminism, or that feminists are making "too big a deal" out of jokes and calling it sexual harassment, or that the sexual harassment law should just be scrapped: 

KoreaBang has also shown the comments made by netizens about the recent Man of Korea Twitter debate and a sexual harassment case reveals that the majority of the translated posts support the rights of the girl child to be free from molestation, but there are also the odd posts that encourage violent attitudes toward women and children. For example, one post reads:

junp****: "If you think she’s cute, just beat her up instead. Punch her in the face, in her ears, in her jaws. You’ll still be fined about 20 million won.. It’s better to get a crime record by hitting her instead of being accused of sexual harassment. And if someone asks you why you beat her up, then tell him you beat her cos she was too cute.. That’s still better than sexually harassing her…"

junp****: "차라리 귀여우면 주먹으로 귀빵망이 갈겨버리고 죽통 아작내 버려라.. 반쯤 죽여놔도 벌금 2천 안나온다.. 글 고 같은 전과라도 성범죄보단 폭행죄가 낫다.. 왜 때렸 나고 물으면 대답해라.. 아 존나 빡치게 귀여워서 그랬 다고.."

We can see there are some misunderstandings about the sexual harassment laws that are clouded by criticism of feminism or reinforced by causal dismissal of the rights of women or calls to violent abuse of women. Rather than mirror these attitudes by random netizens, the Man of Korea membership could take a different path and work toward achieving gender equality. 

Screengrab:

http://www.manofkorea.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mandf&wr_id=473

공창제를 허하라, Should Korean government allow Licensed Prostitution?

남성인권 단체임을 자처하고 나서고 있는 ‘남성연대’가 <공창제>를 주장하고 있다. 그들의 주장은 성매매특별법이 집장촌의 규모만을 줄이고 음지로 숨어들게 했으며, 오히려 성매매를 위한 창구들을 다양화 시켰다는 것이 그들의 주장의 근거다. 사실 그들이 이야기하고자 하는 <공창제>에 대한 심도 깊은 토론은 해외 성매매를 위해 원정을 나가고 있는 한국여성들과 무분별하게 성을 사고파는 한국남성들을 비추어 보았을 때 이 시점에서 시의 적절하다고 생각이 들지만, 그들의 주장의 논리와 근거는 약간은 억지스럽거나 약해 보인다. 아래는 ‘남성연대’ 그들이 생각하는 <공창제를 허하라>에 대한 전문이다.

 Now ‘Korean Union’ strongly insists that our society should allow <Licensed Prostitution>’. They said Korean laws prohibiting prostitution just made the business for prostitution move to invisible dark place. <Licensed Prostitution>, this policy or this law may be alternative solution to consider now. In the figure below, we can see the full text ‘Korean Union’ insists.

 과연 <공창제>란 과연 무엇인가? 남성연대가 배포한 전문을 통해 어렴풋이 알 수 있듯이 <공창제>란 국가와 정부가 성매매를 공식적으로 인정하고 국가와 정부가 성매매와 관련된 성산업을 직접적으로 관리 감독하는 것을 의미한다. 이 <공창제>란 용어는 네덜란드와 헝가리에서 처음 사용이 되었다고 한다.

 As we read this figure, <Licensed Prostitution>, government admits that officially prostitution is legal and should manage everything related to prostitution including people who work at that industry.

 사실 이 <공창제>를 실시하는 국가는 대표적으로 우리도 잘 알고 있는 네덜란드이다. 하지만 네덜란드 이외에도 스위스, 독일, 뉴질랜드, 오스트리아, 터키, 헝가리, 벨기에 등의 국가에서 완전 합법으로 성매매를 인정하고 있다. 이들 국가들은 성매매 여성들을 성산업에서의 노동자로 인정해주고 있으며, 그들에게 세금을 부과하며 또한 정기적으로 신체검진을 의무화 하는 등 체계적인 시스템을 통해 정부하에서 철저한 관리 감독을 하고 있다고 한다. 그 이외에도 이스라엘이나 오스트레일리아, 멕시코, 캐나다 등의 국가들은 성매매를 부분합법으로 인정하는 국가들도 있다.

 하지만 그 이외의 국가들 우리 대한민국이나 중국, 예멘, 사우디아라비아, 아랍에미레이트 등의 여러 국가에서는 성매매를 금지하거나 불법으로 간주하여 성매매에 종사한 사람들을 사형에까지 엄중히 처벌하는 국가들도 많다.

 As you already know, some countries adopted this <Licensed Prostitution> like Netherland, Swiss, Germany, Austria and Belgium etc.

 

 그렇다면 이 <공창제>를 과연 국가가 허해야 하는 것일까?

 How do you think about this law? Should Korean government allow this new policy?

‘현재 성매매특별법을 폐지하고자 하는 성매매 관련자들의 시위, 그리고 성산업의 노동자로 인정해달라고 하는 목소리들이 안팎으로 나오고 있다.’

< We are not whores. We are Sex Workes. >

 사실 <공창제>, 제도적 장치를 만들고자 하는 노력은 국가가 직접 나서서 할 수 있는 성질의 것이 아니라 우리 국민들이 성에 대한 사회적 논의를 통해 합의를 이끌어 내야 하는 문제라고 생각한다. 분명 <공창제>는 한국의 사회속에 뿌리 깊게 박혀있는 음지영역이었던 성매매를 밖으로 끌어 낼 수 있는 확실하고 빠른 방법일 수 있다. 벨기에의 엔트워트시의 경우에서처럼 공창제를 시행한 이 후에 마약, 인신매매, 성폭력, 살인등과 같은 범죄율이 40퍼센트 이상 줄어들었으며 세금도 증가하는 효과를 이뤄냈다고 한다. 또한 종사자들의 대우 역시 매우 개선되었다고 한다. 이는 지난 2010년 7월 시사르포에서 다루었던 경북 포항 성매매 종사 여성들의 열악한 환경과 그들의 죽음은 투명하지 못한 환경 속에 재화와 권력의 틈에 끼어 사회의 보호도 받지 못한채 죽어간 성매매 종사자들의 안타까운 현실들을 미루어 볼 때 <공창제>의 기대감을 엿 볼 수 있다.

Some of women who work at the sex industry try to change the name as sex workers. It means that they had decided to be sex workers voluntary. However, there was a TV program dealt with these women who were killed by pimps or sex trafficking in Pohang. Some of women unlike voluntary women who wanted to do still are suffering from serious sexual abusing. We can see this industry is not transparent. That is why a lot of people want to talk about <Licensed Prostitution> as an alternative.  

하지만 ‘남성연대’의 주장에서는 성매매 종사자 여성들의 인권적인 문제들 보다는 잠재적 범죄자로 보여지는 남성들의 전체를 대변하고 있는 듯 보인다. 즉, 성폭력, 성범죄, 인신매매 등과 같은 근원적인 문제에 대한 원인을 찾기보다는 모호한 피해자와 가해자사이의 구분 짓기에  초점을 맞추어 빠른 결과만을 찾고자 하고 있다.

However, I think Korean Union’s opinions and suggestion seem look like for only males. They did not mention about fundamental issues like sexual abusing, sex trafficking and sexual crime etc and just explained why we need this law. They explained that current prostitution law cannot protect the women and also men who got prostitution. They said this current law just makes the guys as potential perpetrators and victims.

사실 성매매에 있어서는 피해자와 가해자의 공식은 성립되지 않는다고 생각한다. 우리 사회에서의 성매매란 동시에 피해자이며 가해자이다. 아마 이는 ‘남성연대’의 주장과 비슷하게 과거의 성매매와 현재의 성매매의 차이가 존재하기 때문이다. 당연히 인신매매나 성폭력등과 같은 극단적 형태의 성매매는 피해자와 가해자가 분명히 존재한다. 하지만 현재에서 주로 이루어지고 있는 성매매는 그 형태가 자발적이든 그렇지 않든 아직까지도 이 사회가 성에 대한 담론을 두려워하고 있으며 이를 성숙하게 대처하지 못했기에 생겨난 것이다. 그렇기 때문에 나는 ‘남성연대’가 근거로 제시하는 자발적 성매매를 하고 있는 여성들에 대해 과연 조금이라도 머리로라도 이해를 하고 있는가에 대한 질문을 던지고 싶다.

 <공창제>는 사실 쉽게 결론을 내릴 수 있는 간단한 문제는 아니다. 이 제도를 찬성하는 사람들이 생각하는 것처럼 이 제도가 시행되었을 때 과연 성매매가 근절될 수 있을지 또한 성범죄등과 같은 문제들이 완전히 제거 될지는 아무도 예측할 수 없다. 또한 성을 사고파는 행위를 국가에서 관리 감독하는 일들이 누구를 위한 일인가에 대한 문제에 봉착할 수 있다. 그것이 사실 여성인지, 남성인지에 대한 구분 역시 모호해진다. 또한 이 제도가 인권에 대한 제반적인 문제들을 통제 해결하고 사회를 설득 할 수 있는가에 대한 의문도 든다. 당연히 상대적 약자를 위한 장치들이 마련이 되어야 하겠다. 이렇게 이야기를 하자면 필자가 <공창제>를 허해야 한다는 ‘남성연대’의 논조에 찬성하는 것처럼 보이지만, 사실 필자는 허하자 허하지 말자에 대한 이야기 보다는 성숙하지 못한 성적 담론에서는 <공창제>에 대한 문제를 깊이 이해하지 못한다는 것을 말하고 싶다. 우리는 가끔 재화와 서비스, 폭력과 권력, 피해자와 가해자 등과 같은 것들에 집중한 나머지 여성과 남성, 사회와 개인처럼 근본적으로 서로를 이해하고 보호하며 협력해야 하는 큰 틀을 간과하는 경향이 있다. 아무리 좋은 법률과 법제를 제정한다고 하더라도 과정의 꼼꼼함이 없이 결과만을 우선시하는 풍조 속에서는 분명히 소외되는 것들이 존재한다. <공창제> 역시 그러하다. 만약 <공창제>에 대한 심도 깊은 성적 담론과 문제의 이해없이 단순히 정책적으로만 밀어 붙인다면 과거에 그러했듯 소수만을 위한 제도로 남겨질지도 모른다.

<Licensed Prostitution> is not easy problem to solve and talk. I am not sure this <Licensed Prostitution> can be a good solution to protect the people who live with us. And also we don’t know government manage and control this industry fairy if we decided to make <Licensed Prostitution> law. Because we are not sure, we should think about various discourses related gender issues more seriously and carefully. Sometimes we just focus on the result to solve problems. Then we are trying to make a new law to solve the side effects made by previous law.

<Licensed Prostitution> is not simple. We should focus on human rights for minorities. Without understanding sexual discourses and gender issues, we cannot help them and also ourselves.   

  

How do you think about <Licensed Prostitution>?

 [How do you think about 출처] 공창제란 무엇인가?? 공창제와 성매매의 합법의 문제점|작성자 여인네

 [출처] 공창제란 무엇인가?? 공창제와 성매매의 합법의 문제점|작성자 여인네

 [출처] 공창제란 무엇인가?? 공창제와 성매매의 합법의 문제점|작성자 여인네

 [출처] 공창제란 무엇인가?? 공창제와 성매매의 합법의 문제점|작성자 여인네

 [출처] 공창제란 무엇인가?? 공창제와 성매매의 합법의 문제점|작성자 여인네

 [출처] 공창제란 무엇인가?? 공창제와 성매매의 합법의 문제점|작성자 여인네

 [출처] 공창제란 무엇인가?? 공창제와 성매매의 합법의 문제점|작성자 여인네

 [출처] 공창제란 무엇인가?? 공창제와 성매매의 합법의 문제점|작성자 여인네