Reading recent discussions about 2NE1tv and the BBC’s Idol, I was reminded of Lee Hyori’s endearing Off The Record series from 2008, which I’ve tried and failed to find online for years. So I checked again, and to my amazement and consternation discovered that blogger 쓰리에스의 한류 Storyhas actually had all 12 episodes up since last May…
Needless to say, all of them were rapidly in my possession, via this Firefox extension. Normally, it doesn’t work for Naver videos, but I lucked out in this case.
For those who’ve never heard of the series though, please note that it’s hardly a critique of the Korean entertainment industry akin to Idol. But, it does provide some insights into the day-to-day practicalities of it, and makes it obvious why Lee Hyori — Korea’s first ethical sex-symbol — was so popular in the 2000s. Also, even in the rare event that you don’t become a fan yourself, it’s still a valuable Korean study tool, providing a rare combination of everyday Korean language and Korean subtitles that isn’t in the form of an inane gameshow or clichéd drama.
Family may be everything in Korea, but by last year more than 1 in 4 Koreans were living alone, beating rates in (supposedly) more individualistic societies like the US and Australia.
While this provides a lot of opportunities for companies, there’s also a dearth of suitable accommodation. And most of those singles are not carefree youth, but either middle-class 30 and 40-something men, or women in their 60s and above living in poverty. With rates set to become 1 in 3 by 2020, this is set to become a huge political, economic, social, and cultural issue in Korea’s near-future.
For a heads-up, see my latest article for Busan Haps, which includes entirely too much information on why I split up with my first Korean girlfriend…
Update: Also see Sorry, I was drunk for a deconstruction — and demolition — of the oft-cited claim that Korean society is more communal than Western societies.
(This Must be the Place, Roy Lichtenstein, 1965. Source)
— First, the next 2 weekends are just jam-packed with V-day related events, culminating in the Vagina Monologues performances. See Busan Haps for those happening in Busan, and KoreaMaria for Gwangju.And if anyone knows of any more events being held in different cities, please let me know!
— Next, a request from Arianna Casarini (almostelse@gmail.com), who is looking for Korean or East Asian artists that reflect on cosmetic surgery and/or body-image. Unfortunately, I don’t know of any myself, so (with permission) I’m reprinting her email here:
I’m an Italian student of the University of Bologna, close to get my first degree.
Very little after I started getting deeper in the study of Korean culture, I discovered your blog and your illuminating articles, and thanks to it I became especially interested in the problem of the pervasiveness of cosmetic surgery in the South Korean reality.
Since I found the subject really deep and stimulating, I decided to make it the subject of my graduation thesis.
In my thesis, I want to focus on the connection between Art (especially Contemporary Art) and cosmetic surgery, both in Eastern and Western countries. I wish to focus on inspecting the interpretations and criticisms that Contemporary Art gives on the problem of cosmetic surgery, and on the mutual influence that Art and aesthetic plastic surgery have on each other, paying attention to all the psychological and sociological matters implied.
Even though I’m quite well informed on the side of contemporary Western artists whose artworks dwell on cosmetic surgery, I lack a deep knowledge of East Asian artists and I wondered if you could help me on this matter.
Could you indicate me Korean/East Asian artists that reflect on cosmetic surgery/body problems or some essay that treats this subjects?
Sadly I can’t read Korean, so I must specifically look for English sources.
I’m really glad I found your blog and that, thanks to it, I have been able to get to know your interesting work.
I thank you in advance for your attention,
— Finally, Ashley Turner is looking looking for people with experience in web design, visual/graphic arts and audio/video editing who may interested in assisting with a Hallyu project:
Our vision is to help bridge the cultural gap between America (and other Western countries) and Korea by bringing all enthusiasts of Korean culture in a social project that encourages cultural exchange between all fans; as well as making conversation about it accessible to everyone by integrating and welcoming international fans. It is about proving the power of cultural exchange to balance the connection between Korean and international fans and bringing culture outside the context of K-pop, as well as using K-pop as gateway to the rest of culture. The project will serve as a casual learning entry point that makes the Hallyu wave accessible, and allows people reflect on their own culture in relation to Korea’s….
….This project is a social media website being funded by the Korean Cultural Center Washington D.C. and KOFICE (Korea Foundation for International Culture Exchange).
The corresponding proposal [ask Ashley for a copy] has further information concerning the individual aspects of the project. Those with experience in web design, graphic arts, and audio/video editing are being actively scouted. This is primarily a volunteer opportunity with potential for compensation later in development. If you are interested in participating, please contact Ashley at ashley.trnr@gmail.com.
Any readers who also have requests and/or would like events publicized, please just email me and I’d be happy to post them on the blog (and apologies for the slight delays with these ones). To make it easier for me though, when you do please just send something I can quickly copy and paste. Thanks!
Misuse feminist rhetoric, and it’s easy to come across as a prude.
The author of this music column, for instance, laments that SISTAR19 are mere victims, forced to objectify themselves by their management agency. But he never provides any evidence of that coercion, nor elaborates on how members Hyorin and Bora “cross a line” with their sexy dances and tight clothes exactly. By the end of his column, he comes across as a borderline slut-shamer.
Had he not also divulged that, “as a man,” he still likes the results, it would be easy to conclude that they really just made him uncomfortable somehow, his claims of objectification a mere rationalization.
As feminists are accused of all the time, regardless of their sex or sexual orientation.
Still, surely we’ve all been guilty of being too liberal with the ‘O’ word on occasion, and/or lost sight of the fact that it’s actually just as complicated as any ‘ism.’ To make sure everyone is on the same page in future discussions, it would be useful to have a list of its various forms to refer to.
After the translation of the column, I’ll provide two: the Sex Object Test (SOT) devised by Caroline Heldman at Sociological Images, then Evangelia Papadaki’s “Feminist Perspectives on Objectification” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2002). As quickly becomes apparent from them, you may well call SISTAR19’s sexy costumes and choreography crude and unoriginal, but objectifying? They don’t register on those criteria at all. And, by extension, neither does a lot of K-pop.
[HStereo의 음악칼럼]씨스타19 있다 없으니까를 통해 본 여자 아이돌의 성 상품화(19금) / [HStereo’s Music Column] Female Idols are Objectified through SISTAR19’s Gone Not Around Any Longer
확실히 통했다. 씨스타19의 이번 있다 없으니까는 요즘 가장 인기있는 노래이고 공중파에서 1위를 차지하며 씨스타의 인기를 유닛그룹인 씨스타19(효린,보라)로도 계속해서 이어나가고 있다. 안타까운 것은, 씨스타 19를 통해 돌아본 대한민국 여자 아이돌 문화가 가면 갈수록 너무 성 상품화 되고 있는것이 아닌가하는 우려가 생기며 이번 칼럼을 쓰게 됬다. 그리고 이번 칼럼은 섹시컨셉의 글을 건드리는 부분인 만큼 19금으로 가게 될것이다. 사실, 필자도 남자인지라 이번 씨스타19, 너무 좋다. SNL의 이엉돈PD가 씨스타19를 본다면 “저도 참 좋아하는데요, 제가 한번..” 하는 섹드립을 치게 될법한 무대이다. 그만큼 섹시하다. 근데 진짜 솔직히 이 정도 선에서 섹시는 끝나야 한다. 사람들은 시간이 지날수록 더 자극적인걸 원하고 더 야한걸 원하게 된다. 어찌보면 이 시작은 섹시 아이돌이라고 하는 컨셉으로 나오는 여자 가수들의 공통적인 특징이고 “내가 더 야해” 라고 말하고 있는것같은 느낌까지 받게 된다.
It definitely worked: SISTAR19’s song Gone Not Around Any Longer is the most popular song these days, getting a number 1 ranking on the main public broadcast channels. This is having a knock-on effect on SISTAR’s own popularity. This is worrying — SISTAR19 has gotten me thinking about how, as time goes by, Korean female idol culture is becoming too full of sexual objectification.
Since this column is about sexual concepts, it is adults-only. And, because the writer is a man, he likes SISTAR19! Indeed, if Lee Yeong-don, the Production Director of SNL Korea saw them, he would make a sexual joke like “Oh, I really like them too. Can I just one time…” — they’re that sexy. [But] if I speak really honestly, they [still] cross a line.
As time goes by, people want to see more stimulating and revealing things. I get the feeling that, perhaps, this sexy idol concept is the start of female singers all having the common trait of announcing “I am more sexual and revealing [than other female singers].”
(씨스타19의 새앨범 타이틀곡 “있다 없으니까”의 MBC 음악중심 무대영상. 뮤직비디오보다 확실히 무대를 보는게 더 섹시를 강조했다. 특히 투명의자에서 추는 “착시댄스”는 보자마자 놀랠정도로 야했다)
(Caption: A video of SISTAR19 performing their new title song Gone Not Around Any Longer on MBC’s [February 2nd] “Music Core” show. It is much more sexual than the song’s actual music video. In particular, it was their ‘Illusion Dance’ performed on a transparent, perspex bench that immediately showed me how lewd it was.)
James: Here is the — choreography and costumes-wise — virtually identical music video:
물론 이들이 잘못했다는 건 아니다. 남자관점에서 보면 이렇게 섹시아이돌이 나와주는건 고마운(?) 일이다. 다만, 앞서 말했듯이 이제는 어느정도의 수위조절이 필요한것은 아닐까? 하는 생각이 들었다. 씨스타19의 효린같은 경우에는 이미 가창력으로도 인정을 받았어서 필자 개인적으로는 이들이 진정으로 “음악성”으로 승부해도 충분한 아이돌이 될텐데, 왜 자꾸 소속사에서는 옷을 못벗겨 안달이 난것마냥 상품화를 시켜버렸다는것이 좀 안타깝게 작용된다.
Of course, I’m not saying that they did anything wrong. From men’s perspective, we’re grateful for the sexy idols. However, as I said before, this level of exposure needs adjusting [reduced]. This is what I think: SISTAR19’s Hyorin has already been acknowledged for her singing ability; if it came to a contest over true musical talent, SISTAR19 would hold their own. Why then, is their agency so eager to make them constantly take their clothes off? I feel bad that they’re sexually-objectified like this.
(최근 논란이 된 소주브랜드 “처음처럼”의 19금 광고영상. 씨스타의 효린, 포미닛의 현아, 카라의 구하라, 이렇게 3명이 광고모델이 됬다. 논란이 된것은, 유튜브를 이용하여 소셜마케팅을 사용했는데, 조회수 공약으로 높아질수록 광고가 더 야해지는 기발한 S코드의 광고를 찍었다. 이를 보며 수많은 사람들은 여자 아이돌을 “벗기기”를 원하고 있고, 이에 계속 여성의 성 상품화가 적당선에서 계속 흔들거리며 위험수위에 오르지 않을까라는 생각이 들었다.)
(Caption: The controversial R18 commercial for the soju brand Like the First Time; SISTAR’s Hyorin, 4Minute’s Hyuna, and KARA’s Gu Hara are the models. The controversy comes from using the ‘Extraordinary S Code’ social marketing strategy of promising an even more revealing commercial the more hits gained on YouTube. Seeing this, many viewers call for female idols to wear less; if this continues, I fear the sexual objectification of women will overstep a line.)
반면, 현재 아이돌에서 가장 성 상품화 되있는 여자 가수는 누굴까? 누가 뭐래도 바로 현아라고 생각한다. 여자에겐 수치일수도, 자부심일수도 있지만, 그녀는 “패왕색기”라는 별명까지 붙어가며 섹시로 밀고 나가게 되었다. 사실 이는, 대중들이 만들어낸 문화적 코드이다. 안타까운건 아직 나이도 어린 그녀가 너무 “섹시”로만 밀고 나가며 정작 실력있는 뮤지션으로 인정받기가 힘들어질것 같다는 생각이 들었다. 사람이 한번 정해진 이미지는 쉽게 바꾸기 힘들기 때문이다.
Who is the most sexually objectified female singer these days? I’d wager most people would answer Hyuna. To [most] women, such a label could be seen as something shameful, or alternatively as a sign of arrogance. But to someone with the nickname of ‘The One and Only Supreme Queen’ however, this only further promotes her sexual image.
On the other hand, this is just the role the public has designated for her. Yet she is still quite young for it. I worry that if she continues to be labelled and promoted this way, she will never be acknowledged as a musician. It is difficult to change one’s image once it has been set in the public imagination.
(여자 아이돌중에 가장 상품화가 많이 된 아이돌은 단연 현아다. 사실 강남스타일에서 같이 나온 덕분에 외국에 많이 알려진 것도 있고 美빌보드 지에서는 현아를 전 세계 섹시한 여자아이돌 17위에 랭크시키며 세계시장 진출에 큰 가능성이 있는 아이돌이라고 극찬을 하였다.)
(Caption, right: Among female idols, the most sexually-objectified one is of course Hyuna. Thanks to Gangnam Style, she has received a lot of attention and praise overseas, ranking 17th in a list of “Sexist Female Idols” in the U.S. Billboard magazine. She now has a lot of potential to make it big internationally.)
헌데 세계적인 문화 코드로 봐서, 섹시컨셉은 결코 야하고 음란한것이 아닌, 대중문화의 한 큰 틀이 되었다. 그렇기에 빌보드에서도 현아를 세계적인 섹시 여가수 17위에 랭크시킨것은 아닐까? 넓게 보자니 세계문화속에 한국 아이돌이 어우러져 좋을수도 있지만 좁게 보자니 시간이 지날수록 도를 심하게 넘을까 우려되는 것도 어쩔수 없는 현상인듯 하다.
By the way, looking at the world cultural code, a sexy concept is [now] never a too risqué or lewd thing, but a fundamental part of popular culture. Isn’t that why Hyuna was [noticed] by Billboard magazine? Looking at the big picture, it is wonderful that Korean idols are integrating so harmoniously into world culture. But looking more narrowly, as time goes by I am also more and more worried by this phenomenon.
(한류로 인해 수많은 가수들이 일본이나 동남아, 미국으로 진출하고 있다. 그 예로 일본에서 최근 성황리에 활동중인 레인보우. 메이지식품의 “갈보” 초코렛의 광고 모델이 되었는데. 갈보가 일본어로는 “가루보”라고 발음이 되는데, 그게 중요한것이 아니라 왜 하필 한국에서는 정말 입에 담기 힘든 속어인 “갈보”초코렛의 모델이 왜 하필 또 한국 아이돌가수냐는 뜻이다. 그전에, 이들은 이 뜻을 알고는 찍은걸까?)
(Caption: Through Hallyu, many singers are being promoted in Japan, Southeast Asia, and the United States. Take Rainbow for example. Recently successful in Japan, they have become endorsers for Meiji Seika’s “Galbo” chocolate. Whereas in Japanese, it is pronounced “ga-roo-bo,” in Korean “galbo” is a slang word that I can not bring myself to say. Why on Earth are Korean idols endorsing this product? Didn’t they know beforehand?)
한류를 통해 수많은 가수들이 세계로 진출하고 있다. 위의 레인보우 예시처럼, 스스로를 저렇게 “갈보”라고 외칠수 있게 하는 이 대중문화 시장이 이상하게 여기는건 기분탓일수도 있지만, 엄연히 한국의 아이돌이고 갈보라는 뜻은 한국어로는 심하게 안좋은 뜻이다. (뜻을 모르는 사람들을 위해 대놓고 말해서 “걸레창녀”라고 이해하면 된다) 그런 뜻을 알고 이들은 광고를 찍은걸지도 의심되며 기획사 측에서는 파장이 커진다면 어떻게 될지도 생각을 해볼 문제로 판단된다. 문화적 코드로 자리잡은 “한류”에 스스로 먹칠을 가하게 되는 사건이 아닐지, 우려가 되기도 했다. 특히나 레인보우 같은 경우에도 “섹시컨셉”을 밀고 나가는 아이돌가수 아닌가? 이 광고가 과연 19금일까?
Through Hallyu, many singers are promoting themselves overseas. With the above example of Rainbow, it could just be my personal feelings that make me think it strange that the popular culture market makes them yell “galbo” at each other. But they are distinctively Korean idols, and that means something very bad in Korean (for those of you that don’t know, it means “hooker”). Actually, I suspect that they did do, and their agency will view this a problem if news about it spreads further. I also worry that, through such disgrace, they will ruin the established cultural code [image] of Hallyu. Especially in the case of Rainbow, who heavily promote their sexy concept. Is this ad ultimately R18?
(가장 요즘 핫한 댄스인 “착시댄스” 이보다 선을 넘는다면 아이돌에게는 이제 기회보단 위기로 다가올수도 있다)
(Caption: The hottest dance at the moment is this “illusion dance.” But if they cross the line any more, it will become more of a crisis for them than an opportunity [to get noticed])
한류가 계속해서 이어나가고 여자 아이돌 가수가 세계적 진출을 하기 위해선, 섹시컨셉을 버리라는 말은 절대 못하겠다. 허나, 어느정도 선을 유지시켜야 하는것이 맞다고 판단된다. 섹시의 기준을 넘어 싸보이게 가면 안된다는 뜻을 비추는 것이기 때문이다. 좀 심한말로, 섹스를 못해서 안달이 나게 보이면 그건 문제가 있다고 보기 때문이다. 기획사측에게 바라는 것 하나는, 적당한 선의 섹시컨셉과 실력으로 승부할수 있는 아이돌들을 발굴하고 만들어내주길 바랄뿐이다.
In order for Hallyu to continue, and to promote female idols and singers overseas, I can’t bring myself to say they should stop using sexy concepts. But I do think there should be limits: [because] if they overdo it, it emphasizes how cheap that can look. Speaking very harshly, I think it’s a problem if they look too sexually available. One thing I expect from agencies, is that they scout for people who can compete more on ability than on sexual appeal (end).
Whatever our opinion of the author, simply shouting “objectification” doesn’t settle an argument. Instead, he could have used the SOT from Sociological Images, which provides the following suggested criteria to check for (technically only for images, but clearly also applicable to music videos and performances):
1) Does the image show only part(s) of a sexualized person’s body?
2) Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?
3) Does the image show a sexualized person as interchangeable?
4) Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person that can’t consent?
5) Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?
6) Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity (something that can be bought and sold)?
7) Does the image treat a sexualized person’s body as a canvas?
For examples and further discussions of each, see the original post, and I highly recommend also reading Parts 2, 3, and 4 on the harm caused by objectification, and the daily rituals to stop and start doing to avoid that respectively. Like GenderAdvertisements by Erving Goffman (1979), it’s one of those rare pieces that immediately changes your view of the world.
In my case, by allowing me to put my finger on how this Makgeollu ad objectifies Kang So-ra for instance, seen — I kid you not — less then 5 minutes after reading the SOT posts in my local Starbucks. It’s #5, by suggesting that sexual availability is her defining characteristic:
Yet however eye-opening, I’d be lying if I didn’t admit that the SOT ultimately only provides a short, really quite superficial introduction to the subject, commenters at Sociological Images questioning categories 3 and 7 in particular. In that vein, despite now further appreciating (via Part 2) that objectification as a whole is harmful, I’m yet to be convinced that this particular example is so, either for her or for viewers.
Instead, also knowing that the missionary position is the most commonly used sex position for heterosexual couples, and that women look sexually attractive lying on beds as a result (heightened here by the virginal white), then I see a simple case of sex being used to sell.
It would be excruciatingly inane not to expect that in ads.
On the other hand, it is hardly original. Or, through overuse, particularly effective either. And indeed, it is precisely these sorts of complaints about Gone Not Around Any Longer that have the most validity, not hollow, dogmatic rhetoric about victimization and objectification (although perhaps the masked background dancers do partially qualify under #3?).
As explained by Nicholas in his review of the song at Seoulbeats for instance (source, right):
The rest of the music video tended to play out like SISTAR videos past: cube-like neon-lighted sets, with army of back-up dancers (a duo group often equates to a lot of empty space) and emotive posturing next to random objects.
There’s also the SISTAR staple of sexy body waves. While the moves do appear overdone after a while, I’m going to stop ranting about them. After all, this brand of synthesised sexy has become very much a part of their identity. And maybe because of its frequent presences, I’ve become desensitised. As much as I’m numb to this, something must be said about the incongruence of a body wave in a song that talks of pining and loss. No?
As far as I know, that body wave (originally by Beyoncé) was first seen in K-pop in their Ma Boy video, released in April 2011. By the next year, that and ‘booty circles’ had become “two staple moves in the SISTAR arsenal”:
Fany Pack echoes Nicholas in finding it overused however:
It might just be because I don’t have a penis, but I’m getting a little bored with presenting Sistar members as just boobs and ass. I realize they have some of the best bods in kpop (esp. Bora and Hyorin), but come on. Can’t the girls do anything other than stand there and touch themselves? Give them something new to do. I don’t even care if they’re still touching themselves but, like, fighting crime in an action-y video. Or touching themselves while exploring new galaxies in some futuristic, space video. This latest song offers an MV with basically no plot, though.
Before the inevitable “But that’s what ‘Ma Boy’ was like. Why don’t you complain about that song?” response, I know “Ma Boy” had a video about sexy ladies being sexy with no plot. That song was better, though, and didn’t copy the main group’s latest hit so much.
The dance (If you can even call it a dance) was a very lazy dance. The choreographer this time around really ran out of ideas so he just threw a bunch of slow movements together to match the tempo. And when that failed, he recycled some old Sistar dances. Shame. Shame. The reason people loved Ma Boy was its odd blend of Cute and Sexy, the fun dance and the catchy song. They had over a year to come back with an equally great concept or better and failed. The editor couldn’t even do his job and edit out Bora’s wardorbe malfunction. I guess they thought if they gave us an overload of sexy, we wouldn’t catch the sloppy editing. This whole video just screams rushed.
Nevertheless, I love the song. The lyrics of the song are very powerful, and the melody is nice….
Finally, it behooves me to mention Dialectofmyown’s take on their above commercial too:
Sistar are the stars of a new Pelicana commercial advertising for chicken and LO AND BEHOLD, that choreographer for Sistar (whoever they are) went and choreo-ed something creative and completely out of the box: body waves. I know a huge shocker, I can’t think of a single other music video in which the majority of Sistar’s dance is composed of body waves and hip rolls and that’s all, well except for all of the music videos they are known for minus Shady Girl….
Without disputing those opinions, it should also be noted that the body waves and hip roles are ultimately no different to any other group’s overused signature move(s), of which there are many (and, seeing as we’re on the subject, here’s an analysis of Rihanna’s “five unique crotch-grabbing techniques” that just appeared in my Twitter feed). Moreover, their admittedly many wardrobemalfunctions aside, I can’t help but wonder if it’s really the double-standards surrounding (asexual) legs and (slutty) large cleavage that are one reason why Hyorin, for one, gets singled out for “sex-instrument talk [and/or] whore-bashing” by netizens “as soon as SISTAR puts out another music video.” Whereas Girls’ Generation, whose legs are so objectified (#1) that they’ve influenced fashion all over Asia, and spawned a medical tourism boom, don’t seem to attract quite the same opprobrium.
In addition, Sophie of J-Popping fame, writing at Selective Hearing, doesn’t think the choreography is as superfluous as it may seem, placing the music video on the same continuum as Ga-in’s Bloom. I think that’s overdrawn myself, but then I think Bloom is one of the most (sexually) radical K-pop songs of the last decade too, so I’m surely the last person that can accuse someone of reading too much into a music video:
I feel guilty for not saying more about the hyper-sexualization in the video. Certainly, it’s heavily influenced by Ga-in’s ”Bloom: from October 2012, and features sensual depictions of the duo’s sexual desire. There are blindfolded women, the striking contrast of black and white, and a sultry watery motif (It’s a metaphor! For renewal! or…sad!).
Ga-in’s video sparked a debate about whether or not it is empowering for women to be intimately expressing their desires. As “Bloom” was released almost contemporaneously with Hyuna’s “Ice Cream,” participants had to defend their point of view in lieu of a radically different but equally carnal expression of sexuality….
….In particular, the dance [in SISTAR19’s video] is captivatingly visceral. It’s clear from the precision that it’s been highly choreographed, but it’s executed with such emotion that it feels motivated from a place of real emotion. The live performance and dance practice videos have fewer distractions, and I highly recommend viewing them as well.
But we were talking about objectification. So, here are the criteria provided by Evangelia Papadaki in her essay “Feminist Perspectives on Objectification,” available online here:
Objectification is a notion central to feminist theory. It can be roughly defined as the seeing and/or treating a person, usually a woman, as an object. In this entry, the focus is primarily on sexual objectification, objectification occurring in the sexual realm. Martha Nussbaum (1995, p.257; opens PDF) has identified seven features that are involved in the idea of treating a person as an object (source, above-right):
instrumentality: the treatment of a person as a tool for the objectifier’s purposes;
denial of autonomy: the treatment of a person as lacking in autonomy and self-determination;
inertness: the treatment of a person as lacking in agency, and perhaps also in activity;
fungibility: the treatment of a person as interchangeable with other objects;
violability: the treatment of a person as lacking in boundary-integrity;
ownership: the treatment of a person as something that is owned by another (can be bought or sold);
denial of subjectivity: the treatment of a person as something whose experiences and feelings (if any) need not be taken into account.
Rae Langton (2009, pp.228–229; unavailable to view online, but here is a related essay) has added three more features to Nussbaum’s list:
reduction to body: the treatment of a person as identified with their body, or body parts;
reduction to appearance: the treatment of a person primarily in terms of how they look, or how they appear to the senses;
silencing: the treatment of a person as if they are silent, lacking the capacity to speak.
Papadaki’s essay is quite thorough and academic, so I’ll wisely leave discussion of it to interested readers in the comments But, to get that discussion started, I’d be grateful for your thoughts on a) if and/or how any of these new criteria apply to SISTAR19, and b) two final observations:
— No matter how trendy it may be to dismiss them these days, I don’t think the works of centuries-dead white guys have absolutely nothing to teach us about modern society. But still, I really do wonder why “Immanuel Kant’s (1724-1804) views on sexual objectification have been particularly influential for contemporary feminist discussions on this topic” especially as, in Papadaki’s words, he ultimately believed that “The only relationship in which two people can exercise their sexuality without the fear of reducing themselves to objects is monogamous marriage,” let alone is someone who wrote well before the development of photography and mass media (italics in original).
— I’m much more persuaded by Nussbaum’s work, especially by the following (my emphasis in bold):
According to Nussbaum, then: ‘In the matter of objectification context is everything. … in many if not all cases, the difference between an objectionable and a benign use of objectification will be made by the overall context of the human relationship (Nussbaum 1995, 271); ‘… objectification has features that may be either good or bad, depending upon the overall context’ (Nussbaum 1995, 251). Objectification is negative, when it takes place in a context where equality, respect and consent are absent. (Among the negative objectification cases she discusses in her article are Hankinson’s Isabelle and Veronique, the magazine Playboy, and James’s The Golden Bowl). And it is benign/positive, when it is compatible with equality, respect and consent. Nussbaum gives an example of benign objectification: ‘If I am lying around with my lover on the bed, and use his stomach as a pillow there seems to be nothing at all baneful about this, provided that I do so with his consent (or, if he is asleep, with a reasonable belief that he would not mind), and without causing him pain, provided as well, that I do so in the context of a relationship in which he is generally treated as more than a pillow’ (Nussbaum 1995, 265).
Sorry everyone, but this will be the last Korean Gender Reader.
It’s not the workload—this new format, decided upon a few months ago, is really quite light. I even enjoy collecting all the links now. And I do realize that many people look forward to these posts and rely on them.
Really, if I could keep doing them, I would.
The problem is that by their nature, they require a regular posting each week. Whereas partially because of my very limited free time, and partially because planned short posts often turn out to need weeks of extra research and writing, my natural posting style is anything but regular.
Try to combine the two? You’ve already been seeing the results—little but Korean Gender Reader posts filling in the gaps between the long ones. It doesn’t look good at all, and has an obvious solution.
And, frankly, it feels great to be able to post on what and whenever I like again, rather than constantly feeling pressured.
I could go on, including mentioning — no joke — developing repetitive strain injury in my right arm last month, but I’m sure you get the idea. Let me just say that it’s reminded me to only work on what I enjoy, while still doing my best to keep you entertained and informed in the process.
Meanwhile, I’ll continue to post links on Twitter (@JamesTurnbull) and on the blog’s FB page, so all the stories that would have been going up will still be quite accessible really. And I’ll still be very happy and grateful to receive ideas and leads from readers, and/or to post announcements of your upcoming events and so on.
Last week, I found Trance Blossom’s remix (download) of 2NE1’s Scream, and have only danced in my room to it (and surreptitiously on the subway) about 20 times since. Unfortunately, the accompanying video was smote by the copyright gods, but, 2NE1 being 2NE1, I was still looking forward to the MV of the orginal…
No, not quite what I was expecting. But hell: the dancing, costumes, and make-up ain’t half bad.
Meanwhile, here is the original Japanese version. I haven’t been able to find one with accompanying lyrics and English translations, but you can see find both here:
Yes, despite the date, this really did happen to me today…I guess I got rickrolled K-pop style. And now, you too!^^
As I type this, I’ve just returned from having a vacuum cleaner stuck in my ear — an opening line I hereby copyright, just in case I do ever start that novel.
Seriously though, the procedure itself was mercifully painless and brief. But, it came after one trip to an incompetent dentist this week, then two to a much better ear, nose, and throat doctor. Add all the ibuprofen I’ve been taking too, then I didn’t have much time or concentration left for posts this week sorry.
There will be one next week soon about objectification and SISTAR though (specifically, SISTAR19), whom I’d be happy and grateful to hear your thoughts on as I finish writing this weekend. Or, on Camile Paglia, who’s Sex, Art, and American Culture (1992) — a collection of short, impactful magazine articles — has just blown me away since picking up a copy in Seoul a few weeks ago. I didn’t need to think twice about making her my first official writing role model, and am already calculating average sentence word counts!^^
(While you were sleeping 10 by Shin Sun Mi, 2011. Source)
Remember this picture? I’ll wager you do — after all, it was probably the most liked and highly-shared thing I’ve ever posted to the blog’s Facebook page. So, I’m sure many of you will be happy to learn that the artist is having an exhibition at the Gallery Sun Contemporary in Jongno until April 7th…
See here for the details, and thanks very much to Gomushin Girl for letting me know!
SELF China is searching for Korean and/or Chinese women in their thirties and forties who have chosen the unmarried, single lifestyle by choice, and are willing to share their stories with our readers.
If interested in participating, please contact Jean at jean.coolhunt@gmail.com for more information.
Why then, does seeing this picture of her get me so hot and bothered?
Blame the 30-minute subway rides to work as I pass it everyday. After two weeks of those, I’ve realized there are several questions raised by that label of hers, which I’d love to hear your thoughts on (source, right: Guerrilla Feminism):
1) In Korea, has a male celebrity in his late-teens (or older) ever been explicitly marketed as “innocent”?
To be clear, I’m not saying that their general image can’t be innocent. For instance, as described by Bethany at Seoulbeats, this has certainly been the case for Lee Taemin (and, at 19 now, is something he’s trying to shake off):
Many K-pop fans probably also remember cutie pie Taemin debuting at the age of 15, all fresh-faced and adorable. But while he was the youngest member of SHINee, he also boasted the slickest dance moves onstage and in their music video for “Replay,” which still remains my favorite SHINee song to date. Taemin has been pegged as the cute member of SHINee since his debut days, and even though he has taken on a sexier, more mature look in “Lucifer” and more currently, “Sherlock,” noona fans still remember the days of innocent Taemin. It’s lucky that Taemin had such good hyungs who took care of him so diligently — looking at you, Key. He also graduated high school not long ago…
And, of course, such innocent images have indeed been exploited and/or manufactured by advertisers; in Taemin’s case, by cosmetic company Etude House for one, with appropriately cutesy taglines. But explicitly identifying a young male celebrity as innocent, to the extent that there’s a “soonsoohan;순수한” next to his name like next to Suzy’s? Although I’d be happy to be proven wrong (and I do acknowledge the over-generalizations I may be making in this post), I have the strong suspicion that’s a gendered divide which advertisers and the public simply aren’t prepared to cross.
To buttress that point, consider the following thought experiment:
2) Can anyone imagine the sexes reversed in the opening ad?
Alone or with other women, it goes without saying that women are indeed regularly depicted—or explicitly described—as “chic” in advertisements. Or, in any one of any number of other mature, positive terms. But mix the sexes up, and the tendency is to reaffirm gender stereotypes and roles.
Usually, this is subtle, like in the ways described in my Gender Advertisementsin theKorean Context posts. In the opening ad though, it is explicit, the young and innocent females providing the binary opposite to the man’s chicness, thereby affirming his greater sophistication (for a similar example, see this vintage lego ad, ironically usually lauded for its gender neutrality). Which is fine in itself, but to see the sexes reversed is so uncommon as to be jarring, and all the more memorable for it.
3) Is this gender stereotype more prevalent in Korea than elsewhere?
With the provisos that (sexual) innocence will always be treasured more in females than in males, as the latter will always have concerns about the paternity of their children; and that, as Brian in Jeollanam-doput it, everything in Korea “tries to be cute, in the same way everything in the States is “Xtreme” and too cool for school,” I’d wager this is indeed the case. Consider how:
Stressing the cuteness, innocence, and (supposed) asexuality of young female celebrities is the modus operandi — i.e., key to deflecting criticism — of “ajosshi fandom” and “uncle fandom.”
Not only is there also a “The Nation’s Little Sister” out there in addition to Suzy being “The Nation’s First Love,” but: a) There are no male equivalents; and b) Technically, Suzy is actually the thirdfirst love!, with JYP, well-known for experimenting until a concept is shown to work, arguably more responding to this clear media-driven and/or public demand for one rather than deliberately over-promoting Suzy per se.
As a commenter at Netizen Buzz explains (my emphasis; source, right: 윤삼의 블로그):
ppl always complaint that Suzy get too much spotlight, too much articles. But it’s funny that when there’re some articles/ objects about other members, nobody cares. I think it’s not Suzy’s fault to make other members become underrated. it’s just that fans ( specially K-fans) don’t love them enough. If everybody don’t love Suzy so much, she won’t be get so many CFs, drama invitations. You have to understand that they want Suzy to be in their dramas, CFs, not others. So we can’t say “Instead of using Suzy, why don’t we use Min/Jia/Fei?” And JYP can’t do nothing with it. And why ppl kept hating on her? She has to work with a murderous schedule, but she never complaint about anything. Just keep working so hard and share her money to her unnies, but still she get so many hates. You guys always think that’s not fair for others but I think that’s not fair for Suzy too.
And on that note, again I acknowledge any generalizations I may have made in this post (difficult to avoid with something ultimately based on just one ad!), and am happy to learn of exceptions. But even happier though, to learn of your own thoughts on those questions!
Update 1: An April 13 Netizen Buzz headline says “Suzy takes the lead as the star with the most CFs in 2013 with 22.”
Update 2: See KpopStarz for the November 2013 rankings of the various contenders for the title of “Korea’s Little Sister” over the last five years.
(For more posts in the Korean Sociological Image series, see here)
(La Belle Dame Sans Merci by Frank Dicksee, 1902; source)
“This picture is fascinating to me because of its portrayal of a powerful female character who doesn’t fall into any of the typical modern ‘Strong Female Character’ cliches.
The woman is the powerful, sexually assertive and threatening figure here, while the man is the more passive figure, visibly vulnerable to her. However, this portrayal of a woman as assertive and powerful doesn’t rely either on sexualizing her or on presenting that power in masculine ways.”
Thanks very much to the 10 Magazine Book Club for being such a great — and forgiving! — audience last weekend. As promised,* here are the books I mentioned in it, as well as some of the websites.
First, there was An Intimate Affair: Women, Lingerie, and Sexuality by Jill Fields (2007), then Pin-up Grrrls: Feminism, Sexuality, Popular Culture by Maria Buszek (2006, which I talk about in much greater depth in Parts 3 and 4 respectively of my Revealing the Korean Body Politic series (which, in turn, is an extended version of my presentation). Although at 375 and 444 pages each, they’re not for the faint-hearted, both are still very accessible, and definitely reward the effort put into studying them.
Of the two, Pin-up Grrrls was much the more eye-opening for me personally (note the ensuing tagline of my blog!), giving a unique perspective and context on US feminism in the 20th Century that deserves a lot more attention. For a taste, see here for a short essay cum summary of the book, and here, here, here, and here for my own Who are the Korean Pin-up Grrrls? series it inspired.
Next, I highly recommended “Feminization of the 2002 World Cup and Women’s Fandom” by Hyun-Mee Kim in Feminist Cultural Politics in Korea, ed. by Jung-Hwa Oh, 2005, pp. 228-243, for an understanding of the radical role the 2002 World Cup played in changing prevailing Korean attitudes to objectification and women’s sexual subjectivity. In hindsight though, that and most of the chapters in the book are a little dated now, so a better choice is probably Transnational Sport: Gender, Media, and Global Korea by Rachael Miyung Joo (2012) instead. I haven’t read it myself yet, but you can see here and here for reviews.
In the presentation, I used Kim’s chapter to argue that the intensely objectifying, body-centric nature of the current Korean Wave represented a confluence of commercial and governmental interests in exploiting women’s bodies, a precedent for which was set by the — for want a better way to describe it — patriarchal accommodation with and co-option of that feminization of the 2002 World Cup. This in turn was preceded by a long history of girl-groups entertaining foreign and then Korean troops, and at one point the exhortation by the Korean government for women to prostitute themselves to the USFK for the sake of acquiring then much-needed foreign exchange. For more on the former see here, and on the latter see Sex Among Allies: Military Prositution in U.S.-Korea Relations by Katherine Moon (1997).
Unfortunately, I don’t have Moon’s book, but I do have — and was blown away by — Militarized Modernity and Gendered Citizenship in South Korea by Seungsook Moon (2005; yes, a different Moon!), which provides a lot of context. In particular, it’s essential to know about the military regimes’ population control policies, which were every bit as draconian as China’s one-child policy, in order to understand modern Koreans’ attitudes to abortion and contraception. And, once you do read it, you realize that the language I used above was by no means simply hyperbole for the sake of making a point!
If you’re more interested in the surge in male objectification in the last decade though, see Korean Masculinities and Transnational Consumption by Sun Jung (2010), or for an online essay see Stephen Epstein’s and (again) Rachael Miyung Joo’s “Multiple Exposures: Korean Bodies and the Transnational Imagination” in The Asia-Pacific Journal last year. The latter also covers — no pun intended! — entertainment companies’ strategic exposure of girl-group members’ legs, and I discuss the role of that in the rise of ‘ajosshi fandom’ and ‘uncle fandom’ here.
Before moving on to women and girls again though, as one does, note that Sun Jung’s book is also essential for anyone further interested in the (very related) rise of kkotminam (꽃미남), which I did a lot of work on a few years ago here and here.
(Update: As mentioned in the presentation, also see Gusts of Popular Feelinghere for more on the perceived spate of sex crimes against children that led the public to seriously question previously uncritical media narratives of ajosshi fandom.)
The next two books I mentioned were Measured Excess: Status, Gender, and Consumer Nationalism in South Korea by Laura Nelson (2000), then The Home Front & Beyond: American Women in the 1940s by Susan Hartmann (1983). The first is essential reading for anyone wanting to know more about the 1990s in Korea, and in particular the frequent government and media campaigns against over-consumption (in practice aimed almost exclusively at women, these were important precursors to the “beanpaste girl” stereotypes of the 2000s). Meanwhile, unfortunately Susan Hartmann’s book is difficult to get a hold of, but if you do you’ll find it’s a wonderful, very comprehensive introduction to the decade (I’d love to get those on the 1920s, ’30s, and ’50s also, albeit all by different authors). And, as I discuss here (and will expand upon in a later post), the minefield of contradictions presented to women as they were encouraged to remain “feminine” despite entering practical, “masculine” wartime industries in large numbers, yet also being criticized for being so wasteful, frivolous, and unpatriotic for beautifying themselves, is eerily reminiscent of the double-standards and backlash arising from women’s rapid entrance into the part-time workforce in the last decade in Korea also.
Finally, see the end of this post on male objectification for those scans of Stuart and Elizabeth Ewen’s prologue to their Channels of Desire: Mass Images and the Shaping of American Consciousness (1992), which should convince even the most die-hard skeptic of the genuine influence that advertising has on us, no matter how sophisticated and aware we like to all think we are.
If anyone would like more information and/or to discuss the books and websites mentioned above, and/or some specific part of the presentation, then please just let me know in the comments. Of course, they’re just a handful of what would be required for such a reading list really (4 of the 10 mentioned don’t even have anything to do with Korea!), so I’d be very happy — and grateful, frankly — if readers would rather recommend, seek information about, and/or discuss any Korea-related book instead really. After all, I’m sure it would useful to get new perspectives on those we’ve already read, and/or to get recommendations for good ones we haven’t! :)
*(Sorry for the long delay with this post, but unfortunately I have a very good — and somewhat graphic — excuse!)
See the Facebook page for further details, and thanks again to director Barri and cast member Rae for inviting me to sit in on a rehearsal last weekend (which was just AWESOME I might add). Also, I strongly recommend getting reservations, as people had to be turned away at the door last year!
Meanwhile, next week I’m giving a presentationinSeoul; have a magazine article to write; one daughter starting school, the other changing kindergartens; the start of the next semester at my university; and so on (seriously, I really could go on!), so I’ll be much too busy to post again until the week after next sorry. Until then, I hope the stories below keep you occupied, and please remember that Friday, March 8 is my birthday International Women’s Day, with various events happening in GwangjuandSeoul. If readers know of any more, please let me know!
Students at Sungkyunkwan University has created this poster, among many others to point out all the gender discrimination happening with common phrases said between friends and colleagues. The centered text in red reads “WHY do we have to listen to these things” / “WHY do we have to deal with these phrases” (translation open to interpretation)
some of the background text deals with homophobia, rape culture, negative gender stereotypes and heteropatriarchy.
Every time I the conversation of feminism or conversation of gender and sexuality in Korean, it makes me feel good. Because my Korean is very limited, I love adding new words to my dictionary, especially about these things.
Just recently I learned that the Korean translation of Women’s studies is 여성학.. I havent found the equivalent translation for Women’s and Gender studies but Im leaning towards something like 성(sexuality)과 여성학 .?
This is in marked contrast to the South, where a thin figure and big breasts have become symbols of beauty.
According to defectors, if a woman appears well-endowed in the North, people think she is intentionally and lewdly stressing her femininity, and she can easily come to be regarded as a slut. You have an atmosphere that doesn’t allow women to wear revealing clothing, and the North is still a male-dominated society.
One defector from Hoeryong said she had a work friend with large breasts who often ate chives because she’d heard they make your boobs smaller. She added that she was surprised upon learning that women in the South actually have operations to make their breasts bigger.”
Alas, The Joongang Ilbo provides nothing to verify those claims. But, I see no reason why the defectors would lie, and negativestereotypes of large-breasted women are by no means confined to North Korea. Also, who would ever question that “a thin figure and big breasts have become symbols of beauty” in the South?
Fortunately though, Liminality did, who in a must-read response shows that however much the Korean beauty industries and media promotesuch an ideal, and however much East Asian-women may have a genetic predisposition towards small breasts, cosmetic surgery patients at least hardly consider themselves lacking in that department. In fact, quite the opposite:
Per capita, far more breast surgery operations are performed in European and North and South American countries than in Korea (or Asia)
Despite having the highest per capita number of cosmetic surgery operations overall, Korea only came 22nd in the number of breast surgery operations performed per capita
Of those operations, Koreans had slightly less augmentation and lift operations than their counterparts in the US and Brazil, and slightly more reduction surgeries (source, above; reproduced with permission)
Similar attitudes may exist in Japan too, where even lingerie maker Wacoal was surprised by the number of women who told told them they wanted a bra that made their breasts look smaller, and then by the huge popularity of the—yes, really—’Bra That Makes Big Breasts Look Small’ design they developed in response. Also, Japanese mail order fashion magazine Bellemaison has developed a ‘Chest Line Cover’ (see second image below) that “promises to be a cool alternative to wearing a real camisole as Japan prepares for another hot summer made even hotter with another year of power rationing,” which I’m sure readers of both sexes can confirm would probably be just as big a hit in Korea.
But readers don’t need me to tell them that showing cleavage is still a big taboo in Korea, or that there’s a big disconnect between ordinary Koreans’—and even models’—attitudes to fashion, body image, and sexuality and what you may see on Korean TV. And I can’t claim any special expertise on ordinary North Koreans’ attitudes either.
However, when I read that original post at The Marmot’s Hole, by coincidence I’d also just finished The Home Front and Beyond: American Women in the 1940s by Susan M. Hartmann (1983), in which she explains that the massive social dislocations of that decade—in particular, women suddenly entering the workforce in large numbers—were responsible for big changes in women’s fashion there, as well as preferred breast sizes. And, as it happens, North Korea is also going through a very turbulent period at the moment, with power relations between the sexes undergoing especially dramatic change:
Imagine going to work every day and not getting paid. Then, one day, you’re told there’s no work to do — so you must pay the company for the privilege of not working.
This is the daily reality facing Mrs. Kim, a petite 52-year-old North Korean. Her husband’s job in a state-run steel factory requires him to build roads. She can’t remember the last time he received a monthly salary. When there are no roads to build, he has to pay his company around 20 times his paltry monthly salary, she says.
“He had to pay not to work for about six months of last year,” Mrs. Kim told NPR, sighing. “You have to pay, even if you can’t afford to eat. It’s mandatory.”
So she is the one who must keep the family alive, as her husband wrestles with this state-sanctioned extortion.
Welcome to the Orwellian world of work in North Korea. In this reclusive country, profound social change is happening beyond the view of the outside world. The demands of politics have dramatically redrawn gender roles, forcing women to become the breadwinners.
The NPR goes on to mention that one major consequence of that emasculation is skyrocketing domestic violence, against which speculating about ensuing changes in fashions can admittedly sound frivolous. But those have changed regardless—indeed, by government decree. First, in July last year:
Supreme leader Kim Jong-un appears to be loosening the government’s grip on how women dress by allowing them to wear pants, platform shoes and earrings, ABC News reported.
Previously, pants were only permitted as uniforms for females in the factories or the fields — and not for making a fashion statement.
“If caught, sometimes they would cut your pants right there in public to make it into a skirt,” Park Ye-Kyong, who defected to South Korea in 2004, told ABC News.
That doesn’t mean North Korean women don’t enjoy preening, Park added.
“Yes, we were hungry but desire to look beautiful lies in any woman,” she said.
In addition, the next month a 20 year-ban on women riding bicycles was lifted. Ostensibly imposed for women’s safety, numeroussources also mention its supposed incompatibility with juche, related educational television promoting “the idea of a woman wearing a skirt while riding a bicycle [being] contrary to socialist custom.” (See NK News{source, right} for more on North Korean ideals of women). Moreover, in 2009 Human Rights Watch also noted that:
…the ban on pants and bicycles for women is symptomatic of a range of other, often-overlooked, problems.
Across North Korea’s conservative, male-dominated society, there is discrimination against women, a knowing disregard for the consequences of such policies, and an opportunistic manipulation of power by police officers trying to make easy money by preying on an undervalued and underprivileged population.
In light of that, most likely the lifting of the bans was mainly simple populism on the part of a new leader, as well as — despite those state gender ideologies described above — a reluctant concession to the new realities of female breadwinners. Sure enough, in typical North Korean fashion (pun intended), just 5 months later the ban on women riding bicycles would actually bereinstated. Also, while technically they can still keep their pants on, in practice opportunities for women to beautify themselves remain limited, with both sexes punished for straying from officially-sanctioned hairstyles; sharp divisions in what is permissible for married and unmarried women; and a general lack of (beauty-related) resources overall, including such simple things as hairdryers.
Perhaps, things are not changing in North Korea as much as they first appear?
Yet in South Korea at least, it’s true that the last 15 years have seen a vast increase in the numbers of women competing with—and increasingly displacing—men for irregular and part-time work, despite the (extremely low) overall female workforce participation rate remaining unchanged. This has spawned quite a backlash, and—à la The Beauty Myth (1991)—a rapid increase in (overwhelmingly female) objectification in popular culture. So, while again I stress my ignorance and lack of knowledge with anything North-Korea related, it’s not unreasonable to suppose that, surely, the sudden large influx of women into the workforce may also be having some sort of impact there.
Either way, reading about similar experiences elsewhere can inform an understanding of what’s happening in both countries. So, with the obvious—but still necessary—caveat that of course both countries are very different to the US in the 1940s, for the remainder of this post let me try to pass on some of what I’ve learned about what happened there.
First, it’s important to get a sense of the numbers (pp. 77-8):
The female labor force grew by 6.5 million during the war
In 1944, 37% of all adult women were reported in the labor force, but nearly 50% of all women were actually employed at some time during that year
The greatest changes took place among married women
1 in 10 married women entered the work force during the war, representing over 3 million of those 6.5 million new female workers (3.7 million, according to Marilyn Yalom in A History of the Wife {2002; p. 320})
2.89 million were single, the rest widowed or divorced
So, for the first time in US history there were more married women than single women in the workforce.
Note however, that the war resulted in many more marriages than there would have been normally — approximately 1 million more, according to Yalom. Moreover, wives of absentee husbands were twice as likely to seek jobs, with half of all servicemen’s wives being in the labor force
The percentage of wives that worked grew from 13.9 in 1940 to 22.5 in 1944 (Yalom says 15 in 1940 to over 24 in 1945)
The percentage of women with children that worked grew from 7.8 in 1940 to 12.1 in 1944
By 1945, half of all working women were over 35; slightly more than 1 in 4 were 45 or older
The typical female worker had shifted from younger and single to older and married, a pattern which was maintained in the postwar years
As Hartmann elaborates throughout her book, these figures represent an ensuing era of relative opportunity and freedom for many women (including sexual freedom; see Pin-Up Grrrls {2006} by Maria Busnek, pp. 213-224; see below also), even if it was usually simple economic necessity that compelled them to work in the first place (and usually at tedious, menial, and unfulfilling work at that). Accordingly, it definitely set the stage for second-wave feminism in the 1950s and ’60s, and deserves the place it’s gained in the Western historical imagination.
However, it’s also true that despite the huge public and private need for women to enter the workforce, that need was still considerably tempered by both sexes’ preexisting gender and racial ideologies, with both official propaganda and popular culture glamorizing women’s work and stressing its patriotic importance on the one hand, yet emphasizing its strictly temporary nature on the other. Not least, to nervous male workers and servicemen, who: lacked our knowledge that the war would lift the US out of the Depression (source, right); were very much judged by their ability to provide for their families, in an era where many simply couldn’t (note that one big difference between the Depression and the current financial crisis is that many people were literally starving during the former); and who sometimes had genuine difficulties with employment after demobilization, particularly in the shrinking war industries in which the women had been recruited (Hartmann, p. 63).
Buszek summarizes the contradictions of this era well (pp. 214-5):
And in particular:
Despite the huge demand for workers, and the ultimate, relative flexibility both employers and male employees would demonstrate in incorporating Caucasian women into their midst, African-American women remained largely unwelcome (e.g., 10 months after Pearl Harbor, there were fewer than 100 out of 3000 women in Detroit war industries). So, while the numbers of them working did increase from 1.5 million in 1940 to 2.1 million in 1944, their share of the female labor force actually dipped from 13.8 to 12.5. By 1950, their employment patterns were very similar to those of 10 years earlier, albeit partially because by then their husbands were making more money. (Hartmann, pp. 60, 78-9)
Partially, the huge numbers of wives that entered the workforce is because there were previously bans against them by many companies, let alone being against social convention; even schools discriminated against them. It’s amazing how quickly bans were dropped once the need for labor arose though, with some previously hostile managers coming to express a “preference for married women as more stable and conscientious than their single sisters” (pp. 59-60). And this provides encouraging news for Korea, which unfortunately still largely retains those conventions, and where as recently as 2009 I was working for a company that — yes, really — fired women upon marriage (source, right).
Nevertheless, there remained extreme public and private ambivalence about working mothers. Officially seen as more of a social problem than something to be encouraged, officials did recognize “that financial need compelled some mothers to work and that in localities with severe labor shortages production goals would requite the employment of mothers,” and urged employers not to discriminate against them (p.58). But on the other hand, the government would also constantly remind them that homestay mothers were essential for children’s development; popular culture was full of stories of child neglect; and daycare provision, while expanded, was ultimately completely inadequate, paling behind that which was provided in the UK, and prompting frustrated managers of some defense plants to set up their own (Yalom, pp. 324-6).
But, lest we forget, this post is about breasts. And changes in women’s fashions which came with the contradictions involved with entering the workforce, with women having to confront rampant sexual harassment on the one hand, and often being blamed for the “distraction” they posed, but on the other relishing their newfound freedoms (Buszek, pp. 216-7):
However, the combination of war-time shortages and women’s entrance into the workforce meant that people suddenly became used to women in functional, masculine clothing and with more practical hairstyles, and that women’s fashions became more simplified, comfortable, less overtly sexual, and changed less frequently than before. So, when you learn that popular culture stressed the exact opposite, for example…
That female workers were still “glamorous” and feminine despite their new roles (Hartmann, p. 199)
As were female sport stars, women’s sports enjoying a lot of popularity while their male counterparts were occupied (p. 194)
Lingerie manufacturers coped with wartime shortages and new demand by producing much practical bras, yet these coincided with pinup photographs that emphasized their subjects’ breasts (Jill Fields, An Intimate Affair: Women, Lingerie and Sexuality, 2007, p. 106). As explained in Part 3 of this series, this ultimately led to the fashion for large and uplifted breasts that remains to this day.
…then it is very easy and natural — indeed, this is my very strong impression from the books discussed here, although exact page references are suddenly proving maddeningly elusive(!) — to argue that this alternate ideal was imposed by, for want of a better word, the patriarchy, to encourage women to enter the workforce yet at the same time remind them that their place there was unnatural and temporary. And, to be clear, not for a moment am I arguing that this wasn’t very much the case (source, right).
However, as Hartmann explains on p. 198 below (echoed by the other sources), it’s also true that women themselves were just as passionate about preserving their femininity (indeed, they would understandably revel in impractical but much more feminine fashions once war rationing ended):
In particular, and especially in light of the new opportunities open to them as mentioned, I think it’s both overly dogmatic and patronizing to dismiss choosing to use those feminine adornments as mere false consciousness and women’s own mindless incorporation of patriarchal values. Also, although it’s true that the period was rife with pop psychology theories (it was conveniently claimed that women like boring, monotonous work much more than men for instance) it’s very unlikely that men and women rationalized and articulated their choices and concerns in such patriarchal terms. Even if those did operate on a subconscious level, and patriarchy is still the only thread which can bring otherwise disparate developments in the period together, surely men did not think, for example, that if they saw more big-breasted women in popular culture, emphasizing the differences between the sexes as increased use of lipstick did in the workplace, that this would make them feel more secure in their jobs.
In addition, while changes in attitudes were certainly quick, they didn’t happen overnight, Jill Fields (p. 106) noting that “uplift” and “separation” trends in bras for instance, which accentuated the projection of the breast silhouette, had actually already started back in the 1930s. Finally, if you’re confused like I am, because I just noted above that bras actually became more practical during wartime, and am now stating that women could simultaneously be censured and praised for wearing distracting clothes, that’s because contradictory and competing trends coexisted simultaneously, the 1940s being just as messy, complicated, and contradictory as modern life.
And on that note, thank you very much for bearing with me in this admittedly equally messy, complicated, and contradictory post, the result of me personally trying to understand what patriarchy means in practice as well as theory. And, with the proviso that my relief — and frankly joy — at discovering historic parallels (and especially English-language historiography!) to modern North and South Korean developments should make me wary of projecting too much, and not blind me to the significant differences, I’m very happy to have pointers towards further study, and very much welcome readers’ own suggestions! (source, right)
Update: See Fit, Feminist, and (almost) Fifty for “the medical condemnations of women’s cycling [which are] fascinating for what they tell us about what people thought (and maybe still think?) about women’s athletic capabilities and potential.”
Update 2: “Saudi daily al-Yawm cited an unnamed official as saying women can now ride bikes in parks and recreational areas. According to the official, the ruling stipulated that women must wear a full-body abaya, be accompanied by a male relative, and stay within certain areas. They are allowed to bike for recreational purposes only, not as a primary mode of transportation.” (Aljazeera)
Sorry for the lack of posts — the one I’m working on is proving much more involved (and several thousand more words!) than I expected. But I will have it up early sometime next week, and will try to make it worth the wait :)
Rather than me decorate this post with some random Korean and/or gender-related image this week, let me pass on one of something far more useful: a screenshot of the webpage for f.lux, a small and easily-installable computer program which softens your computer screen’s brightness after sunset. Found via the comments thread to this article at io9, about how using computer screens — designed to be as bright as the sun — at night is screwing up our sleep, I’ve been using it for about 10 days now, and it’s already done wonders for my tired eyes at least.
Click here to download it, and fellow geeks and amateur astronomers may also be interested in this post at ScienceBlogs, which explains some of the science behind it.
p.s. Unfortunately, it’s unavailable for Android (although it is available for the iPhone and iPad); if anybody knows an equivalent that is, please please please let me know!
p.p.s. If you have problems with the program dimming at the wrong time, like I did, go to your Control Panel and check you’re set to the right time zone, despite what you’ve set your computer’s clock to. Once I changed it, this also cleared up 5 years of frustrating, weirdly-timed emails for me!
I’ve been asked by Jerry Liu, the maker of the “Cute Lines for Cute Girls” video featured 2 weeks ago, to ask what readers’ reactions are to the above video.
As explained by the makers of this one (Simple Pickup), “all the faces, we interacted with, which aren’t blurred were given consent forms because their reactions were too funny.”
These are pictures of classroom areas at the JangHeung Area Children’s Center, located in JangHeung Eup of JangHeung County, Jeollanamdo. Our Center serves 61 children from one of the 5 poorest counties in Korea. Currently we have 3 classrooms at our center. 2 are one-room classroom buildings. That is what you see above. One of the classroom buildings is 100% unusable, the 2nd classroom building is not good either.
Our Center operates on an educational budget of less than 1,200,000w per month, less than 20,000w per child. Our total budget is less than 80,000w per month for each child. This is less than 50% of the tuition for any one hagwon that I am familiar with.
All of the children in our program come to us through the local welfare office. As you might imagine finances are tight and we don’t have money for extra things. That includes replacing our 2 classroom buildings. To continue our mission of providing a quality education for the children in our program it is imperative that we acquire the necessary funds to meet this essential need and provide safe, usable classroom space for our children. We need your help to do that.
For More Information about us please visit our facebook group at JangHeung Area Children’s Center. Please join us today.
To make a donation of 20,000w, 30,000w, or 50,000w please send bank transfer to:
NongHyup Bank 657-01-074288 Fundraising Goal: 12,000,000w
(Sources: left, right)
The Grand Narrative 