|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:46 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| fermentation wrote: |
| I honestly think Korea will come to accept homosexuality faster than the US has. Perhaps tolerate is the right word. I don't see the same type of hostile homophobia as I've seen in the States, except for perhaps certain Christians. Even most of the Christians I know who are "against" gays are not particularly hateful; they consider it weird and abnormal. I think that's the general attitude of Koreans regarding homosexuality I've personally observed. Not really accepting of it, but not necessarily seeing it as a target of hate and violence either. Gay marriage on the other hand might be a entirely different issue. |
Actually, this would describe the attitude of most Christians back home that I know. They disagree with it but aren't hostile or violent. If a family member became "gay", they'd still be welcome in the family. Only a few hicks would espouse hatred and gay bashing. Gay marriage is another issue for them. Don't believe everything you read in the western media. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Weigookin74 wrote: |
| Actually, this would describe the attitude of most Christians back home that I know. They disagree with it but aren't hostile or violent. If a family member became "gay", they'd still be welcome in the family. Only a few hicks would espouse hatred and gay bashing. Gay marriage is another issue for them. Don't believe everything you read in the western media. |
Most people I know personally aren't hateful (other wise I wouldn't keep them around as acquaintances) but I've encountered the types of people we all like to make fun of. People who have told me we should round them up and shoot them.
For all the Korean Christian bashing I do, I have yet to see one of those crazy nutjobs who go around lecturing people on the evils of homosexuality like on college campuses in the US. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think its a mixed bag. On the one hand you have the "Gays don't exist in Korea" mindset from some as well as generally conservative attitudes about such things. Multiple Korean people I've met who held progressive, even radical political views were squeamish about homosexuality. On the other hand you don't have the uber-macho thuggin/jock culture that you get back in the US.
The one thing is that gay people can walk the streets here and not be called out for how they talk or dress or their mannerisms and lead their day-to-day lives in relative peace and free of harassment. Heck, they might even be called "stylish" and cute instead of some of the less pleasant things people have to say about their fashion choices back home. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So annoying! Why would a guy writing about homosexuality take such a chauvinistic approach to this SEXUALITY issue--approaching it as if it's a male-dominated "phenomenon"??? Idiot! Another hack, writing about things he knows very little about!
I mean, I don't think any article can be perfect, but including lesbianism in this semi-historical account of "Korean homosexuality (i.e. same-sex)" (  if there is even such a thing as a country-specific account of sexuality) would have done service to the issue without invariably falling into the patriarchal exclusionism that plagues the sexual world from the outset.
I can only imagine a feminist sitting in her (or his) army fatigues with a cigar in one hand and twirling a carefully crafted noose in the other. (Yes, I guess that makes me a feminist~~ where's my cigar?)
Female homosexuality apparently doesn't matter at all. I feel like he grew up in Korea--a land where they promote children sitting separately from each other at age 7 to artificially create a sense of the separation of the sexes. (남녀칠세부동석)
His editor should have suggested scrapping the utterly useless blogtrash at the bottom and sticking to the issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sml7285
Joined: 26 Apr 2012
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| I feel like he grew up in Korea--a land where they promote children sitting separately from each other at age 7 to artificially create a sense of the separation of the sexes. |
Males and females choose to sit apart from each other from around age 6 to age 14/15 in pretty much any country you go to...
This isn't just a Korean thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sml7285 wrote: |
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| I feel like he grew up in Korea--a land where they promote children sitting separately from each other at age 7 to artificially create a sense of the separation of the sexes. |
Males and females choose to sit apart from each other from around age 6 to age 14/15 in pretty much any country you go to...
This isn't just a Korean thing. |
He's talking about a Josun era practice where boys and girls aren't permitted to be in the same room. Of course it's not practiced anymore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
highstreet
Joined: 13 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 11:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think I saw a openly gay male Korean couple a few days ago. Mid day, two young males in their 20's, not drunk, holding hands openly. Which I've only seen older people or really young kids doing. Neat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fermentation wrote: |
| sml7285 wrote: |
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| I feel like he grew up in Korea--a land where they promote children sitting separately from each other at age 7 to artificially create a sense of the separation of the sexes. |
Males and females choose to sit apart from each other from around age 6 to age 14/15 in pretty much any country you go to...
This isn't just a Korean thing. |
He's talking about a Josun era practice where boys and girls aren't permitted to be in the same room. Of course it's not practiced anymore. |
+1; Yes, fermentation is correct. It is not, in namesake, practiced any more. But the rigid divide remains--ESPECIALLY ONE THAT WAS FOLLOWED PRETTY MUCH TO THE CONFUCIAN LETTER WHEN IT WAS PRACTICED (over that very, very long history Korea often boasts of)...and the separation still holds reign here culturally: holidays, often outdoor sports for elementary kids, and even games all exhibit rigid gender separations--separations that often manifest themselves in the compulsory "commonsense" of gendered differences that is intrinsic in many cultural and non-cultural practices in Korea, from dating, marriage, and down to childrearing and just basically living.
Fine Print/ Disclaimer for Steelrod & other sympathizers: yes, this rigid patriarchal assumption exists in most societies. (Korean feminists, however, assert that they patriarchal influences far exceed the experiences of most other developed countries*). But, that still doesn't justify ignoring lesbians in an article about homosexuality.
*<성매매의 정치학> 한울아카데미 2006...for the "give me proof, give me proof" non-researching (probably won't or can't read) whiners.
**@sml7285: I'm not even going to attempt to touch a comment that's so off base with reality as to legitimize an age-old forced imperial edict (and its consequent influences) with a generalization that "any country you go to" you'll see kids 6 to 14/15 (as if the distinction between 14 & 15 makes this somehow more concise and well thought out) consciously or unconsciously separate from each other. (Guess I did touch it though...doh! ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| But, that still doesn't justify ignoring lesbians in an article about homosexuality. |
Does it justify ignoring transsexuals? Were transsexuals mentioned in your rebuttal? And bisexuals? What about the bi-curious? Weren't you being biased there?
Or can we recognize that this is a small piece, not a full 5 page article and that including examples of problems faced by every single group would probably exceed the word count the editor was looking for?
If someone does an article on racism, should they track down every group under the sun? "Alright, we gotta make sure we cover the blacks, Sub-Saharan Africans, black latinos, black non-hispanic Caribbeans, white hispanics, non-white hispanics, East Asians, Pacific Islanders, Eskimos, Native Americans, South American Indigenous people, Aborigines, Micronesians, South-East Asians, Indian Subcontinent people, Central Asians, Arabs, Persians, Kurds, Chaldeans, Druze, Gypsies, Irish, Italians, Slavs, Racism against White Anglo-Saxons, and anyone of mixed ancestry. Then and only then do we print. I we don't cover everyone, obviously its because of our biases and this article will not be biased! And I want this article to be 500-750 words."
| Quote: |
| often outdoor sports for elementary kids, |
Sports separated based on gender? I can't imagine any other country doing that...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Games
| Quote: |
| separations that often manifest themselves in the compulsory "commonsense" of gendered differences that is intrinsic in many cultural and non-cultural practices in Korea |
I know you listed your disclaimer, but it seems you don't really get how common it is back home.
Thank goodness there aren't any shows or attention given to such things elsewhere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_Cave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_pad
Holidays? Oh yeah, back home the ladies loved to sit around the TV on Thanksgiving and gripe about the Lions and make fun of John Madden, fart, drink beer, and oggle the cheerleaders. Now there's always at least one aunt who is down with that, but still, even she goes of to the other room to chat with the other women. Just as the guys will wander to that room to get away from things for a moment, but there's definite zones.
| Quote: |
| with a generalization that "any country you go to" you'll see kids 6 to 14/15 (as if the distinction between 14 & 15 makes this somehow more concise and well thought out) consciously or unconsciously separate from each other |
I don't know which is more off-base, the idea that boys and girls here NEVER play together (gee I must be hallucinating what I see on my school playground every day during recess) or that in other countries voluntary separation of the sexes in children is rare? Sure they may be the odd tomboy, but most girls don't have much interest in throwing dirt clods at each other, seeing how far they can chuck a rock, or belching contests and most boys don't seem to fancy My Little Pony, learning about make-up, and playing whatever that rubber-band stepping game it is they play here. Yes they'll get together for a game of tag or uno or kickball, but they go back to boys and girls afterwards. THEY'RE KIDS. Seriously, I don't notice too many girls that can fashion just about anything into some sort of weapon the way boys do.
Are we seriously debating this?
Last edited by Steelrails on Wed Jun 20, 2012 6:52 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| But, that still doesn't justify ignoring lesbians in an article about homosexuality. |
Does it justify ignoring transsexuals? Were transsexuals mentioned in your rebuttal? And bisexuals? What about the bi-curious? Weren't you being biased there? |
I'm not going to waste my time reading the "stuff" you wrote below that quoted above. It was an article about homosexuality in Korea. Don't you think you can answer your questions without being so depend on everyone else?
Do you think an article on "homosexuality" justifies ignoring transsexuality, bisexuals, and bi-curious? An article we're talking here...an article...on what again? Homosexuality (not "sexuality" or "queers"--homosexuality). Please post an honest and CONCISE reply. We're all interested to see how much you understand this topic.    |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| But, that still doesn't justify ignoring lesbians in an article about homosexuality. |
Does it justify ignoring transsexuals? Were transsexuals mentioned in your rebuttal? And bisexuals? What about the bi-curious? Weren't you being biased there? |
I'm not going to waste my time reading the "stuff" you wrote below that quoted above. It was an article about homosexuality in Korea. Don't you think you can answer your questions without being so depend on everyone else?
Do you think an article on "homosexuality" justifies ignoring transsexuality, bisexuals, and bi-curious? An article we're talking here...an article...on what again? Homosexuality (not "sexuality" or "queers"--homosexuality). Please post an honest and CONCISE reply. We're all interested to see how much you understand this topic. |
You were upset that the article failed to mention lesbians. In your post you failed to mention transgenders, bisexuals, and bi-curious people. You only focused on lesbians. I'm merely pointing out your hypocrisy.
And as to why I'm mentioning Bis and Transgender people concerning an article about homosexual rights, does the term LGBT mean anything to you? Was the term LGBT used in the article? Is the article incomplete because it doesn't include a story about people of every possible sexual state?
I don't see anything wrong with failing to include a personal story about lesbians in what is a short piece, not a full, in-depth article. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sml7285
Joined: 26 Apr 2012
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rchristo10 wrote: |
**@sml7285: I'm not even going to attempt to touch a comment that's so off base with reality as to legitimize an age-old forced imperial edict (and its consequent influences) with a generalization that "any country you go to" you'll see kids 6 to 14/15 (as if the distinction between 14 & 15 makes this somehow more concise and well thought out) consciously or unconsciously separate from each other. (Guess I did touch it though...doh!) |
I don't know what you're trying to get at. I'm not stating that there is absolutely no contact between boys and girls. Young boys will throw dirt, wiggle around worms, etc at girls to bother and annoy them, but then will go back to playing with other boys.
During middle school, there's more interaction and "dating", but from what I've seen (being a swim coach and shadowing during a college teaching course) that other than the occasional chat, most boys hang out with boys and most girls hang out with girls.
It's really not until early to mid highschool (around 14/15) that the two genders really intermingle with kids having close friends of both sexes.
Don't understand how that was a point of contention...
| Quote: |
| I feel like he grew up in Korea--a land where they promote children sitting separately from each other at age 7 to artificially create a sense of the separation of the sexes. |
When did I ever try to "legitimize an age-old forced imperial edict"? I was replying to your idea that Korea today promotes separation. Perhaps you should've considered the use of the present perfect "a land where since the Josun Era, they have promoted children sitting separately."
Don't bite at me when my reply was warranted given what you said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| rchristo10 wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| But, that still doesn't justify ignoring lesbians in an article about homosexuality. |
Does it justify ignoring transsexuals? Were transsexuals mentioned in your rebuttal? And bisexuals? What about the bi-curious? Weren't you being biased there? |
I'm not going to waste my time reading the "stuff" you wrote below that quoted above. It was an article about homosexuality in Korea. Don't you think you can answer your questions without being so depend on everyone else?
Do you think an article on "homosexuality" justifies ignoring transsexuality, bisexuals, and bi-curious? An article we're talking here...an article...on what again? Homosexuality (not "sexuality" or "queers"--homosexuality). Please post an honest and CONCISE reply. We're all interested to see how much you understand this topic. |
You were upset that the article failed to mention lesbians. In your post you failed to mention transgenders, bisexuals, and bi-curious people. You only focused on lesbians. I'm merely pointing out your hypocrisy. |
There's no hypocrisy, dumba$$, it's an article about homosexuality. I'm writing about why lesbians must be mentioned in the article about homosexuality. Stop trying to be such a smarta$$ and admit you made a reading mistake (again).
LGBT is a term that has been defined as being related to queer studies (see Frisch, 2002; Doan & Higgins, 2011; Knopp 2007; Bell, Binnie, Holliday, Longhurst, & Peace, 2001; Holliday, 1999; Holliday & Thompson, 2001; Valintine, 1996--You can find their works and educate yourself).
This article was neither a treatise (which would be a book!) on sexuality nor was it a paper on queer. It was an article about homosexuality. That doesn't include bi-sexuals and transgender--they are included when studies are about queers and sometimes gay studies.
There's no hypocrisy, yet there's a great deal of denial--coming specifically from you. Again, you're being a hack. You don't know the field again and attempting to make yourself feel so erudite. Not sure why. You seriously have issues. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rchristo10
Joined: 14 Jul 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sml7285 wrote: |
| rchristo10 wrote: |
**@sml7285: I'm not even going to attempt to touch a comment that's so off base with reality as to legitimize an age-old forced imperial edict (and its consequent influences) with a generalization that "any country you go to" you'll see kids 6 to 14/15 (as if the distinction between 14 & 15 makes this somehow more concise and well thought out) consciously or unconsciously separate from each other. (Guess I did touch it though...doh!) |
I don't know what you're trying to get at. I'm not stating that there is absolutely no contact between boys and girls. Young boys will throw dirt, wiggle around worms, etc at girls to bother and annoy them, but then will go back to playing with other boys.
During middle school, there's more interaction and "dating", but from what I've seen (being a swim coach and shadowing during a college teaching course) that other than the occasional chat, most boys hang out with boys and most girls hang out with girls.
It's really not until early to mid highschool (around 14/15) that the two genders really intermingle with kids having close friends of both sexes.
Don't understand how that was a point of contention...
| Quote: |
| I feel like he grew up in Korea--a land where they promote children sitting separately from each other at age 7 to artificially create a sense of the separation of the sexes. |
When did I ever try to "legitimize an age-old forced imperial edict"? I was replying to your idea that Korea today promotes separation. Perhaps you should've considered the use of the present perfect "a land where since the Josun Era, they have promoted children sitting separately."
Don't bite at me when my reply was warranted given what you said. |
Hey, no harm intended. I'm just saying that the effects of sexual segregation in Korea has led to a patriarchal system that's considered even by Korean scholars as particularly strong in comparison to other developed nations. If you read the book that I referenced for you (성매매의 정치), you'll see that it's a bit stronger than simply talking about happenstance, voluntary gender separation between boys and girls. As you likely know, my mentioning 남녀친세부동석 was an allusive device--sort of like mentioning things during biblical times to emphasis circumstances/ situations of today.
And, when you think about it, the roles of boys and girls, even in places like the US, are pretty ambiguous. It's not like we haven't all seen little boys playing with barbies & clanking around in his mother's oversized high-heels and girls digging their nails in the dirt to find a scurrying bugs, participating in spit contests & bugar flicks. However, the same gender behavioral swapping for those 7-14/15 year olds is less common here--especially because such behavior is strictly not acceptable. Of course, I'm also generalizing here...based on the few encounters I've had. I also think that Korea is changing really fast in terms of what guys and girls do and their expected roles. The cigarette smoking is proof of that--fo' sho. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| . I'm writing about why lesbians must be mentioned in the article about homosexuality. |
No, they don't. Not in a brief article.
If there was an article about racism of the same length, if they only chose to profile blacks or whites or whoever, that would be fine. You can't mention every group under the sun. The article must be of a certain length and given that constraint, in order to go in even minor detail with any group, you probably have to choose just one.
| Quote: |
| It was an article about homosexuality. That doesn't include bi-sexuals and transgender--they are included when studies are about queers and sometimes gay studies. |
So homosexuals and queers are not the same? I think to the average person out there they are. And apparently they are sometimes part of the discussion on gays.
You don't think bisexuals and transgenders feel part of that discussion on homosexual rights and acceptance?
Do you think the average religious right person or jock is going to differentiate much between a bisexual and a homosexual? They may not have expertise, but they are the ones that are making life difficult for alternative lifestyle people.
Dude, stop trying to stir up an issue where none exists. It was a short article, not every group is going to get mentioned. That's fine.
| Quote: |
| You don't know the field |
You're looking at this from an academic angle. I'm looking at it from a politics/business/man on the street angle. Completely different interpretations of things. You're talking theory and ideals. I'm talking practicality and business.
The objective of the article was not to give an all-encompassing view of homosexual life in Korea. It was not an in-deoth It was a relatively short opinion piece outlining a trend with a couple of interest stories thrown in and a bit of a plug for a movie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
