How was the Korean Housewife Constructed?

Yesterday I posted a critique of the lazy way we toss around the term Confucian to describe contemporary Korean gender roles. A great comment by a reader prompted me to add additional explanation of what we might overlook when we focus on ‘Confucian’ and ‘traditional’ values. For a more specific discussion of Confucian ideology, I have written about Confucianism and the Choson Dynasty on this blog a few times: Power & Gender in the Early Korean State, Fashion: Regulating the Inner/Outer in Choson Korea, Comparing Marriage in the Middle Ages and Korea’s Choson Dynasty: 서양의 중세 초기와 조선의 결혼비교, and 조선 초기의 파워와 젠더체제. Here I’d like to throw out for our consideration some important alternate explanations of the contemporary construction of family life in Korea. 

I point out internal and external factors that have affected Korea in its modern history to emphasize the breadth of forces at play that are left entirely out of the discussion when we rush to attribute something to Korea's Confucian past. 

Many Confucian social and legal regulations were codified that affected family life, especially between 1300 and 1700. But there is significant doubt as to how deeply Confucian values penetrated into the common social consciousness, as they were largely codes to regulate the elite yangban. The colonial period was immediately predated by a ‘rush to modernize’ to avoid colonization in the late 1800s. On top of that the colonial period through 1945 was a major disruption in so many social structures that we might dub ‘traditional’ so that what we are calling ‘traditional’ today is a complicated reassertion or reconstruction or reclaiming of ‘traditions’ which shouldn’t be presented as a continuous march to the present. There are absolutely some lingering legacies, but we need to add depth to our understanding of Confucianism if we are going to throw it around as an explanation for Korean society today. Worse, I fear that by relying too heavily on the convenience of the Confucian explanation, we overlook more important influences on family life.

For example, in talking about housewives, we should not have this conversation without discussing the following major influences in recent history:

THE FIRST being the urbanization drive under Park Chung Hee, which disrupted ‘traditional’ family life in incredibly transformative ways. In Confucian and even in colonial period Korea family structures were generally larger multi-generational networks and geographically close. Pre-industrialization in Korea (which was only partially ushered in during the colonial period) families were more agrarian and family roles quite different from today. Here on the blog we have discussed the Theory of Compressed Modernization, which describes how Korea underwent rapid transformation in under 60 years that Europe process over the course of 200 years. When Park Chung Hee pushed urban industrialization, state policy transformed the family. Where once a network of women and men cooperated in a large family unit, now a mother was mobilized to prepare her husband, children (male and female) for economic competition in the city and factory. When the state didn’t have the foresight to prepare some social safety nets for the elderly left in the countryside, it was more convenient to criticize women for abandoning their ‘traditional’ roles than acknowledge how the state had reconstructed family life without preparing to care for the old. Newspapers in the 1970s criticize women (similar critiques emerged of the ‘New Woman’ in the colonial period). This transformation under Park Chung Hee sounds a lot more like the housewife Harper describes than anything in Confucian texts or dating back to Choson. There are absolutely some lingering legacies of Confucian ideology in Korean society, but these are redefined and deployed by contemporary actors.

SECOND, we can’t overlook the reality that European and North American societies made basically the same general decisions about gendered division of labor amidst industrialization. This is another reason to doubt a uniquely Korean tradition that created the housewife.

THIRD, I think the intensification of competition for rapid modernization probably has had the most direct and adverse affects on human rights conditions in Korean society. This means that in thinking about how to address these harms, we are distracting ourselves with ‘Confucian tradition’ when maybe we should instead be thinking about the hegemonic way Samsung corporate structure harms family life in contemporary Korea, or the continued mobilization of the people by government to make steep sacrifices with inadequate social safety nets. Looking too distantly and too ‘culturally’ into Korea’s past obscures the political and economic changes we can demand today that are changing patterns of inequality. We need only look to the incredibly important influence of the IMF crisis in the 1990s, which reversed a lot of trends in Korean society toward gender equality. Not unlike recessions in other regions, women pay a heavier price for economic slowdown, and that isn’t unique to Korea. It is a failure of most societies to adequately engage women productively in society in ways that respect their human rights. For more discussion of Compressed Modernization Theory on this blog, please see Compressed Modernization for Gender Studies 압축적 근대성와 젠더 and 압축적 근대성 이론 Compressed Modernization Theory for Korean Studies.

TO wrap this up, I think it is really skipping quite a few steps to simplistically say that the housewife in contemporary Korea is a Confucian tradition unique to Korea. It just isn’t that linear. Better to understand a variety of factors and locate the influences that have the most detrimental effects on women’s human rights.

--
Lastly, I've written a few times about the problem of associating violence against women as 'unique' to certain societies. Some of these earlier posts could definitely use some revisiting, revising or renewed debate. In the following posts I emphasize that HOW we talk about violence against women is very important:

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

Yoon is NOT in a 'sex scandal'

Buzzfeed! Fearing rape is not a “Unique side effect of being an Indian girl”

Single Moms & Korean Fertility Policy 싱글맘와 한국의의 가족계획

~녀 뉴스 or Nyo News, the Female Files

MBC 응답 Responses to MBC's The Shocking Reality About Relationships With Foreigners

Rape and Sex Offender Registry in Korea 성폭행와 성범죄자알림

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."  

[CAUSE] Systemic Change: Donation Drive for Single Moms' Day

I am always impressed with the highly engaged and passionate individuals and groups in and outside of Korea that volunteer for and donate to orphanages, women’s' shelters and other direct-service providers.

I also appreciate projects like Single Moms' Day that work for systematic change, that work to disrupt structural forces that separate families, deny children's human rights, and discriminate against women. 

Just in the past few years progress is demonstrated by improvements in the law, yet economically-interested lobbyists are trying to circumvent the laws designed to keep families together. 

SMD advocates for human rights in a number of important ways, in particularly by addressing systemic discrimination by “informing people inside and outside Korea about the factors that pressure unwed mothers to relinquish their children for adoption. Push factors include fathers’ child support obligations being unenforced; lack of adequate social welfare from the Korean government; social discrimination against unwed mothers and their children. Pull factors include the fact that more than half of unwed mothers in facilities are living in unwed mothers’ shelters that are owned and operated by adoption agencies; a money-driven international adoption system that does not conform to the UN CRC or the Hague Convention, i.e., it does not respect children’s humans rights.”

SMD Planning Meeting

Most impressively, Single Moms' Day is an inclusive collaboration of parents and adoptees initiating this change and demanding a departure from stigmatization and legal discrimination. I have learned so much about international human rights law, Korean society, family life, policy and  from Single Moms' Day and I hope to share this knowledge with my friends who are also passionate about structural change.

We don't want to continue to witness a system that separates children from their parents, do we? We want to learn about the persistent legacies of adoption policy in Korea, don't we? We want to make sure that all children have full human rights, educational and social opportunities, right? Please join us in attending and supporting "Accountability for the Past, Rights for the Future: The 3rd Single Moms’ Day."

Event information available here.

Please consider making a donation today:

입양단체 TRACK의 월간운영예산은 2백만원입니다. 그예산으로 한국인 3명 (그중에서 두명은 양육미혼모)을 파트타임으로 고용합니다. 대표인 Jane Jeong Trenka를 비롯하여 TRACK에서 활동하는 입양인들은 돈안받고 활동하고 있습니다. TRACK는 다음달에 인권에 대한 만화 (예산 3백만원)도 출판하고 제3회 싱글맘의 날 행사 (예산 1천2백만원)를 주최할 예정입니다. 이러한 활동을 지원해주고 싶으신 분 TRACK웹사이트에 방문해주시길 바랍니다. TRACK는 TRACK의 원리를 따라서 정부나 종교 단체에게 지원을 받지 않습니다). 

TRACK's operating expenses are $2,000+ per month. With this money, we provide part-time employment for three Koreans, two of whom are unwed mothers raising their kids and who provide the daily administration for Dandelions (the families of origin of adoptees). I am a volunteer, as are all of the adoptees who participate in TRACK. If you would like to donate towards our operating expenses, our comic book on human rights to be released in early May ($3,000+) or Single Moms' Day ($11,000+), please see our Web site to find out how to donate. Out of principle, we do not accept money from the Korean government or religious groups. Please and thank you!

가정폭력 Domestic Violence Awareness : Music & Media

In 2012 social debate and political battles over domestic violence, rape and gender equality repeatedly made headlines in both South Korea and the United States. In Korea, the rape and murder of kidnapped woman cast a spotlight on weak state and police enforcement of laws to protect citizens. In the U.S., politicians debated whether or not to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act and a number of politicians embarrassed themselves into election losses with absurd statements about rape. Most disturbingly, some states cut their funding to domestic violence prevention and support programs.

Domestic Violence and Music 가정폭력과 음악

Two powerful music videos portray domestic violence in 2012. The vocalists Zia and P!nk highlight the complicated emotional and physical space we navigate when confronting or recovering from domestic violence.

2012년에 매우 힘이 넘치는 영화 같은 뮤직비디오에서는 지아와 핑크가 가정폭력의 복잡한 감정적이며 신체적인 고통을 보여준다.

Zia - For a year 지아 -일 년째

P!nk – Try 핑크 – 트라이

Domestic Violence and History 가정폭력과 역사

Domestic violence is a major problem in contemporary society in Korea and the United States, and in regions all over the world. When I read Choson Court rulings on domestic violence, rape, adultery and spousal murder, I am reminded that centuries ago the legal system did not recognize women’s rights and we appealed to the patriarchal rule of the father or pre-modern state local officials to abide by virtues of justice and morality and requested that they not abuse the people. There wasn’t a strong social mindset that recognized the rights of women and children, nor adequate tools of state to enforce human rights.

가정폭력은 한국, 미국, 세계적으로 커다란 이슈이다.  조선시대에 처를 살해한 사건자료를 읽으면서  현대사회의 인권문제에 대한 제도가 퇴보되어간다고 생각됐다. . 옛날에 우리나라는 국가나 경찰대신 가장의 도덕와 공평성을 통해  그 가정의 삶의 질이 결정되었다. 이러한 관습은  힘 없는 사람들은 자비를 구해야했다. 

                For example, Choson royal court records include the case of Lee Geun-Bin. In this case a wife was beaten to death with the heavy cast-iron style lid from a cookery. The case shows obvious domestic violence. She may have been beaten not only by her husband, but her father-in-law and brother-in-law whom lived in the same home. The unnamed wife attempted to flee to her natal home, but she lost strength and died. A pattern of violence had already existed in the home, but in those days a wife was isolated from society and there were few opportunities for a wife to appeal for help and the private home was ruled by the father. The Choson records reveal a number of other cases in which wives were murdered by their husbands, with rare and light punishments ordered by the royal court.

이군빈의 재판에 보면 실망스럽게도 너무나 명백한 가정 폭력이다.[1] 그 자료에 따르면 “부자의 공초에, “부축하여 앉혔다”는 말로 미루어보면, 그녀가 힘이 빠져서 집에 다다르기 전에 인사불성명되었음을 알 수 있”다고 이군빈의 거짓말로 가정폭력의 사실 보여준다: “솥뚜껑으로 때렸다”고 말했다.[1] 조선시대의 가부체제 아래에 있는 학대의 희생자들은 도움이 받는 것이 힘들었고 가장은 자신의 집안에서 왕처럼 통치했다.

However, we have since developed state-managed systems to improve the enforcement and protection of the rights of all people, such as police, courts and public education. In some regions, there is not a functioning system to protect or enforce these rights and societies still rely on patriarchal benevolence, for example when raped women or women who have sex outside of marriage are murdered, so-called  ‘honor killings’ by relatives to ‘preserve’ the family ‘honor’ that was supposedly tarnished by her ‘impurity.’

하지만 근대 국가 아래 우리는 국가관리의 인권, 경찰, 병원, 편파적이지 않은 재판, 사회 복지를 향상시킨 체제가 만들어졌다. 그러나 인권존중이 되지않는  몇몇 국가에서는 지금도 성폭행 피해자와 간통했던 여성이   명예살인이나 공개처형당하지만   전세계사회는  변화되고 있다.

Domestic Violence and Society 가정폭력과 사회 

In Korea, society still struggles to overcome the hierarchical power of the patriarch when the police do not enter the home without his permission. We can see in the Sokcho case last year that a woman could be raped and murdered while the police are ineffective. Society did not pay adequate attention to the problem of domestic violence, and individually we might ‘look the other way’ and ignore violence in our communities. However, in December 2012 the Korean National Police Agency granted new powers, “the new rule now allows police to enter even if a home owner denies the police request. The police expect the measure will help save victims who are afraid of revenge attacks after calling for help.”

 현대 한국사회에서도 가정의 가부적인 계급 사회을 위해 발버둥 치고 있다. 작년의  속초 성폭행 사건에서 보면 효력 없는 경찰들이 가장[아부지]부터의 허가 없는 경우에  집을 들러가지 않았고 여자가 살해 일어났다. 비단 그뿐 아니라 우리는 자주 가정 폭력을 무시했다.

Meanwhile, in the United States, several states have already cut their budget for domestic violence programs, and more will do so next year:

“Domestic violence calls are second only to burglary for law enforcement. Police regard them as among the most dangerous in terms of officer safety because of the violent emotions often in play when they arrive at the scene. Arrests and prosecution are part of the picture, but only a part. Victims need options, shelter, counseling, financial assistance, and education. Victims who want desperately to leave violent domestic situations without police intervention often need those resources even more. It is in this context that states across America, faced with mounting budget crises, are slashing domestic violence programs and funding. The most widely reported has been the use of the Governor’s veto pen in California. But domestic violence prevention and service funding has also met the budget ax in states like Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Arizona, Missouri and others.”[2]

Worse, some states such as Kansas have cut response calls by police, putting many people in danger of abuse and death from domestic violence:

“Busted budgets have forced tough decisions by governments and law enforcement officials nationwide, but the Shawnee County district attorney's move to stop investigating domestic abuse and other misdemeanor cases has angered victims' advocates who say austerity has gone too far.”[3]

In the United States, some conservative politicians call for ‘small government’ but the consequence could be a return to ‘rule by the father’ wherein women must once again plead for health and life, rather than know these are enforced and protected rights.

미국에서 어느 지방 등에서 가정 폭력 예방하는 프로그램의 예산을 삭감했고 내년에 더 다른 지방에서도 예산을 절감하려고한다. 더군나 미국 캔자스나 다른 지역에서 예산절감때문에 가정폭력을 신고하여도 경찰은 출동할수 없고 도움을 받을 수 없게되었다. 집에서 가정 폭력 당하는따라서 시민들의 건강와 안전 위험에 직면해서 가정 폭력으로 부터 피살될 수 있다. 미국에서도 보수적인 사람들이 ‘작은 국가’가  필요로 하다고 주장하고 있다. 가정폭력예방 예산 삭감이나 국가의  인권에 관한 무관심은 그러나  이는  가부장제의 통치로 되돌아가는 결과를 나을 것이다. 그래서 여성들이 다시 건강, 안보, 삶을 위해 가장에게 의지하고 무가치한 존재로  보일 것이다. 

  

Here in Korea, resources for domestic violence and sexual violence are available, please reach out if you are need of support: Seoul Rape Medical Treatment and National Police Hospital (located on Line 3, exit 1)

---

[1] 처를 살해한 것, p. 238-241.

[2]Sweete, Elijah. April, 2010 athttp://themoderatevoice.com/68729/domestic-violence-victims-endangered-by-budget-cuts/#A3v80pyzPBYZQzZT.99

[3] AP Topeka Kansas, Oct. 12, 2011, http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-20119017.html

Park Geun-hye: [Female] Presidential Candidate

Park Geun-hye: Female Presidential Candidate

Read other posts by Tamara Gater here. 

“The time is ripe for the nation to have a strong female leadership as the harsh economic reality facing grass-root citizens calls upon a leader who can sacrifice herself like a mother for the sake of people’s livelihoods.” - Park Geun- Hye[1]

In the bid to become Korea’s first female president, Park Guen Hye has been type cast in a double role of leader and mother. In politics, everyone has a role to play and this year, the theatre of Korean presidential elections offers a unique performance of Shakespeare’s renowned Merchant of Venice. While a tragedy of comedies it may have been in the late 16th century England; this week in Seoul, the curtains are being drawn for the final act. 

[Scene 1] Enter, the merchant Antonio artfully played by DUP’s very own – Moon Jae In. Like Antonio, Moon Jae In is happy to help his friends but unfortunately like Antonio’s ships, Moon Jae In’s policies are lost at sea. So he willingly sings a contract with Shylock promising things he, himself is not quite sure he can give, since all his good intentions may very well be a shipwreck. Since Shylock asks for no interest on repayments, this alliance between them seems most advantageous to Antonio who intentionally fails to acknowledge the ‘pound of flesh’ clause.

[Scene 2] Lights dim, a giant ‘Ahn lab’ logo flashes up on stage. Young students in the audience jeer and clap. Enter Shylock, the moneylender who despite his business success is treated as an outsider, played by the independent Ahn Cheol Soo. Like Shylock, Ahn’s grievance is against a system which sees people like Antonio flourish while he himself is barred from furthering his ambition. So he agrees to support Antonio in the hopes of getting something in return. Where Shylock wants a pound of Antonio’s flesh, Ahn wishes the alliance with Moon to propel his own political career. Yet in the end, Shylock walked away with less than what he started out with and at present Ahn too has little to show for his efforts.

[Scene 3] Sombre songs from the 70’s resonate through the auditorium. Those from the Gyeongsang in the audience sing along. Enter Portia, the daughter of a man long dead whose memory lives on with his daughter, played by the solitary figure of Park Geun Hye. Indeed, this solitude is where the characters of Portia and Park Geun Hye differ. Unlike Portia’s father who chose a husband for her from his grave through the use of a clever riddle, Park Chung Hee’s sudden assassination prevented him from arranging his daughter’s marriage. Today 33 years later, Park Geun Hye is as much criticised for being unmarried as she is for being her father’s daughter.

Perhaps ‘criticised’ is too light of a word. She is downright ridiculed on two ends of the spectrum. On the one side, Hwang Sang-min, a professor of psychology at the prestigious Yonsei University, has publicly dehumanised[2] Park Geun Hye by saying on a talk show, that:

“[In Korean society, the role of a woman] is defined by marrying a husband, giving birth and raising a child. That’s someone you call a woman. Just because her reproductive organs are different from a man’s, you don’t call her a woman…Park never played the role of woman, although she has female genitals”[3]

Moreover, according to Professor Hwang’s definition of a woman’s role in Korean society, Park Geun Hye is prevented from making a contribution to Korean society through her failure to fulfil her duty as a woman, by which he means wife and mother. So in basic terms, Professor Hwang’s argument is founded on the premise that Park Geun Hye’s involvement in the public domain is made void by the fact that she has not created a life for herself in the private domain.

While on the other end of the spectrum, Park Geun Hye’s own campaign manager, Kim Soon-joo has proclaimed that:

“Her[Park Guen Hye] [virginal] life has been dedicated to the state and as such it is no exaggeration to call it ‘marriage to the state.’[4]

So the flipside to Professor Hwang’s argument is that that Park Geun Hye has compromised a life in the private domain in order to be involved wholeheartedly in the public domain. So in other words, if a woman is not married with children, then she is either altogether not a woman, or she should make a sacrifice to the public domain in order to compensate for her deficiencies in the private sphere. So Park Geun Hye, 60 and single, has only but one choice - to become ‘married to the state’ and to ‘sacrifice herself for the people’.[5]

A message clearly conveyed by the ad campaign released by the Park Geun Hye’s team last week. If I could offer words to the images of this 60 second video clip, they would read “my solitude is my sacrifice.”

Simply put, a woman may enter the public sphere so long as she excels in the private sphere. Do you remember when you were in high school and asked your parents if you could join the sports team? Their answer would usually go something like ‘yes, but only if it doesn’t distract you from your studies and you keep your grades up.’ The same principle applies here. Because in the eyes of society, a woman’s career is an extracurricular activity, in order to gain admission, she must first pass the preliminary requirements of successfully managing the private sphere. In this case, Park Guen Hye is especially disadvantaged because being unmarried means that there are no photo ops where her husband is snapped with a ‘Vote Park Geun Hye’ badge pinned to his business suit which translates into an A+ in the private to public sphere entrance exam.

The lines between the private and public sphere are as clearly marked today as they were in Shakespeare’s time, when only men were allowed to act on stage. Luckily, in the Korean theatre of presidential elections, we have both men and women up on centre stage. Yet, although the candidates are auditioning for the role of President, the audience are judging the women’s, and here namely Park Guen’s Hye’s talent on how well she plays her role of woman. In the play of Merchant of Venice, the character of Portia removed this judgement and forced the audience to focus on her skill as a lawyer by appearing in court in a disguise of a man. So maybe there is a lesson in that and in the play for the top job at the Blue House, Park Geun Hye should be encouraged to come without a disguise, not without her womanhood.

---

[1] Kang, Hyun-kyung, ‘Ice Princess’ finally plays gender card’ The Korea Times, 30 October, 2012

[2] The Collins Dictionary online defines ‘dehumanise’ as ‘1. to deprive of human qualities’ and ‘2. to render mechanical, artificial, or routine.’ By debasing Park Geun Hye as a woman, yet having made an anatomical distinction between her and a man, Hwang Sang-min has deprived Park Geun Hye of human qualities and has rendered her neither man nor woman due to the fact that she has neither husband nor children. [Online at] http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/dehumanize

[3] Ser Myo-ja, ‘Park plays the gender card to draw contrast’, Korea Joongang Daily, 08 November 2012, [online at] http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=2962007

[4] Justin C ‘Presidential Candidate Park Geun-hye is ‘Married to the State’, Korea Bang, 9 November 2012, [online at] http://www.koreabang.com/2012/stories/presidential-candidate-park-geun-hye-is-married-to-the-state.html

[5] Interestingly enough, a man’s claim to be ‘the father of his nation’ or even the term ‘fatherland’, traditionally implies left wing patriotism. Think Francisco Franco in Spain, Stalin in Russia and of course Kim Il Sung in North Korea. 

Comparing Marriage in the Middle Ages and Korea’s Choson Dynasty: 서양의 중세 초기와 조선의 결혼비교

          Recently I have been studying gender structures in the Choson Dynasty in Korea. Although the Choson Dynasty ended with the colonization of Korea by Japan, even in the post-colonial period and after the Korean War, the Choson period can be said to have an influential role in shaping contemporary Korean thought and society. Many customs and laws affecting gender roles are justified by (if not directly influenced by) Confucian thought or re-imaginings of the Choson Dynasty.

서양의 중세 초기와 조선시대의 젠더체계를 살펴보면(비교해 보면) 많은 비슷한 면(유사점)을 발견할 수 있다. 유럽의 “중세 초기에 가톨릭 교회는 점진적으로 결론에 대한 법적 권한을 장악해 나갔”고 한국에서 조선시대 유교학자들은 새로운 사회법체제를 선립했다 (옐롬, 96).    

If we compare the Middle Ages in Europe with the Choson Dynasty in Korea we can find many similar gender hierarchies to analyze. We can also find differences, for example according to Yalom, in the Middle Ages the Catholic church, much like the Confucian elites redefined marriage customs, and  in the Catholic case these emphasized the consent of the couple, no longer requiring the consent of their parents. Thus, unlike Confucian thought, which still holds that parental consent should play a part in marriage, Catholics required a marriage at the church but also downplayed the consent of parents (Yalom, 45-46).

기혼여성의 인권에 대해 비교할때 옐롬에 따르면 “남편은 아내의 재산, 의복, 보석과 심지어 침대시트까지 처분할 수 있었다. 그리고 아내가 자신의 요구에 응하지 않을 경우, 남편은 아내를 때릴  수 있는 법적인 권한를 가지고 있었다. 대부분의 나라에서 [19세기까지] 남편들은 일단 마음만 먹으면 살인죄를 적용받지 않고 아내를 체벌할  있었다 (옐롬, 97).” 마찬가지로 한국에서도 비슷한 인식이 생겨났다 “여자는 사흘을 안 때리면 여우가 된다 (Tieszen, 50).” 그리고 유교와 비슷하게 “아내는 – 그녀의 사회적 지위와는 상관없이 – 자기 남편보다 아랫사람이다 (옐롬, 97).” 한국가장이 생각했던 것 처럼 루터도 “성 행위는 다른 육체적 활동과 다름없이 ‘자연스러운’ 것으로 것으로 간주되고 있다”고 생각하다 (옐롬, 177).

If we compare the rights of married women, in the Middle Ages women lost the right to their own property, even jewelry and other goods that they carried into their marital homes (Yalom, 97). Furthermore, the wife was imagined as a person subservient to her husband, and she could be punished beatings so long as she was not murdered, laws protecting these rights of the husband to beat his wife persisted in some European nations into the 19^th century (Yalom, 46). In another argument for the subservience of wives to their husbands, and women to men in general, Reformer Martin Luther justified the marriage of clergymen according to the need for men’s sexual satisfaction and for housekeeping (Yalom, 177). Similarly there were common attitudes toward married women in Choson Korea, epitomized by Korean folk sayings such as “If you don’t beat your wife for three days, she turns into a fox (Tieszen, 50).” Prior to the redefinition of marital and property laws by Choson elites, women had enjoyed inheritance rights and some property rights during the Koryo Dynasty, but these eroded over time until women lost all rights to inheritance or property-ownership.

더구나 상급 양반사회의  남자의 생활에 대해 생각하면 남자들의 도덕에 모순이 있었다. 조선시대 유교학자들은 여성도덕을 요구하며 (때로는 기생집에서) 성노동자의 신분제를 확립하고 결혼한 유교학자들은 첩(정부)이나 일부다처제 하에 있는 부인의 인권을 제한했다. 비슷하게 루터시대에 “많은 목사(성직자)들이 첩들과 함께 살고 있었으며 그들 가운데 많은 수의가 자식을 낳았기 때문에 그는 동거하느니 결혼을 하는 것이 낫다고 판단했”고 루터는  “여성이 남성의 성적 욕구와 가정을 이루려는 욕구를 만족시키기 위해 필요하다”고 생각했다 (옐롬, 177).

          Furthermore, although the Confucian elites were preoccupied with social morality, a contradiction emerged in their attitudes toward men’s lifestyles. In order to entertain elite men, a select group of women were trained in literature and other arts, to serve as entertainers, and in some cases trained in sex work. During the Choson period, men were permitted to have multiple wives and concubines, but the class status of wives was rigidly recorded and regulated by law in order to ensure a ‘primary son’ who could inherit ancestral lands and properties, while ‘secondary sons’ and sisters were eventually disinherited (Deuchler, 236). Similarly, in Martin Luther’s day many clergymen had concubines and illegitimate children, so he argued for the rights of the clergy to marry and to have sex.

 하지만 유교과 달리 “교회는 합법적인 결혼을 성사시키는 데 부모의 동의보다 약혼한 배우자들의 의지를 주요한 기준으로 내세운 것이다 (옐롬, 96).”

이처럼 서양의 중세 초기에 의식의 변화가 있었던 반면, 한국사회에서는 왜 여전히 부모의 동의를 중요하게 생각하고 됬을까?

          However, unlike Confucian elites European churches, particularly in the Catholic tradition, emphasized the consent of marriage partners, rather than their parent’s consent. Why did this shift occur while Confucianists continued to place emphasis on parental consent?

한편 파워는 팜므 솔르들의 좋은 예외를 통해 여성의 인권과 공적 생활를 재평가하고 있다.:

“무엇보다도 12세기부터 무역이 늘고 도시가 성장하면서, 도시 중산층 계급의 상류 계층 사람들이 점차 목소리를 내기 시작하였다. 중산층의 여성관은 교회나 귀족의 그것에 비해 여성들의 실제적 위상을 더 잘 이해하고 있었다. 도시의 법률은 특정 직종에 종사하는 여성들, 특히 독자적인 사업을 하는 결혼한 여성들 (femmes soles: 과부들)의 지위를 반영했다. 팜므 솔르 (femmes soles)에 대해 규정은 당초 그 여자들의 남편을 보호하기 위한 것이었지만, 결과적으로 여성의 지위가 높아졌다 (파워, 35).” 

사실상남편을 보호하는 법체제를 유지하면서 여성들의 인권을 보장하고 상당한 자립을 보장했던 것이다. 조선 시대에서도 여성들의 인권과 관련하여 (연관지어) 예외를 볼 수 있을까? 유교체제가 가져온 인식과 함께 한국사회의 예외를 평가한다면 당시 한국 사회를 다르게 이해할 수 있지 않을까? 

          Power also presents an interesting example for comparison of women’s rights and social position. In medieval Europe the wealthy middle classes pushed back against the trends depriving women of rights, and particularly Town Laws emphasized the rights of women to participate in trade (Power, 2). Although Power points out that these laws were also designed to protect the economic interests of husbands, the right to commerce and the possibility of some economic self-sufficiency and public work may have been quite different from Choson society that emphasized women’s role in the home. The example also begs a question: Would societies have been quite different if the middle classes had more widespread influence than the church and elite with their downward imposition of what came to be ‘official’ ideas about women and marriage?  

References

파워, 아일린. 2010(1920) «중세의 여인들» 이종인 옮김. 즐거운 상상. 

옐롬, 매릴린. 2003. «아내: 순종 혹은 반항의 역» 이호영 옮김. 시공사. [2장, 3장]. 

도이힐러, 마르티나. 2005. «한국사회의 유교적 변환» 이훈상 옮김. 아카넷. 

Yalom, Marilyn, 2001. A history of the wife. London : Pandora.

Edna, Eileen, 1975. Medieval Women. Cambridge [Eng.] ; New York : Cambridge University Press. 

Deuchler, Martina. 1995. The Confucian Transformation of Korea. Harvard University Press.

Tieszen , Helen Rose. “Proverbs” in Virtues in Conflict: Tradition and the Korean Woman Today, ed. Mattielli, Sandra, 1977, p. 50.