“It was there for actually 0.1 seconds! And drawn by a man! And…and…WHY THE HELL DO YOU FEEL SO THREATENED BY IT ANYWAY??”

Estimated studying time: 12 minutes. Picture by Timur Weber @Pexels.

It’s at all times heartwarming when a columnist actually calls bullshit on the Korean manosphere.

For that sass alone, in a second I’ll gladly go on to you my full translation of Hankyoreh Gender Workforce Chief Jang Su-gyeong’s accusation, written in December 2023 about the MapleStory controversy of the earlier month.

However for all her aptitude, I believe it was a bit of misdirected.

“I’m very and anxious about hatred and discrimination, which cling as prevalent and thick in Korean society as air.”

Principally, she criticizes the controversy for being solely the newest instance of the ‘feminist verify’ tactic the Korean manosphere engages in lately. Whereby they: go bananas over any alleged occasion of a small penis finger gesture; dig deep to search out proof that these accountable have even the slightest of feminist leanings; then shrilly demand the corporate accountable fireplace them and take away the offending gesture.

That is extra pernicious and impactful than it could sound to outdoors observers. Emboldened by the time period “feminism/페미니즘/女性主義” extra precisely that means radical feminism in Korean, to most women and men alike, just about anybody even solely not directly advocating for sexual equality can get tarred with that brush. And when that occurs, say, for sporting t-shirts incels don’t like, corporations are solely too desperate to throw these actual or alleged “femis/페미” beneath the bus, all for the sake of appeasing the manosphere.

Supply: John Marcotte.

So I share her ire, and don’t wish to get too hung up on semantics. It’s simply that, exactly as a result of the manosphere can be so loud and proud about what they doing, why they’re doing it, and who they’re hurting, with completely no subterfuge vital, maybe “bullshitting” isn’t one of the best ways to explain the method.

Or, maybe I solely say that with the good thing about hindsight.

As a result of as if to show her level, an much more bullshit controversy, over nonexistent authorities plans to change the genders of emergency exit indicators, is rising as I sort this a month later.

As you’ll see after her column, it’s a way more blatant instance of what she describes. Particularly while you distinction it with an actual instance, which there was a transparent want for, made nationwide to the caregiver figures in subway escalator indicators within the late-2000s. And which, to the perfect of my information, didn’t lead to any hurt to anybody’s sense of manhood—irrespective of how deeply the Korean manosphere appears to really feel threatened if the identical ‘concessions’ had been made right now.

Left: the offending gesture, which is seen for exactly 0.1 second. Full screenshot supply: 원정상 @YouTube. (For the document, I simply thought it was too good a screenshot to not steal—I don’t know the YouTuber’s stance on the controversy.)

너 페미니? Are You a Femi?

장수경/Jang Su-gyeong, 2023-12-17 (flying710@hani.co.kr/@jsggija)

“너는 페미니스트야?”

“Are you a feminist?”

몇달 전 대학 때 친하게 지낸 남자 동기를 만나 들은 질문이다. 질문을 받은 뒤 처음 느낀 감정은 당황스러움이었다. 그동안 받아본 적 없는 질문이었기 때문이다. 페미니스트냐 아니냐를 따지는 게 무의미할 정도로, 나는 스스로 페미니스트가 아니라는 생각을 해본 적이 없던 터였다.

It is a query I used to be requested a couple of months in the past, once I met a male classmate with whom I used to be near in college. My first response was embarrassment. As a result of it was a query I’d by no means been requested earlier than. I’d by no means considered myself as *not* a feminist, to the purpose the place it was meaningless to contemplate whether or not I used to be one or not.

“나는 페미니스트지.”

“Yea, I’m a feminist.”

“왜 너 자신을 그렇게 규정해? 네가 생각하는 페미니즘이 뭐야?”

“Why do you outline your self like that? What do you suppose feminism is?”

“여성과 남성은 동등하고, 성별에서 오는 각종 차별을 없애야 한다는 거지.”

“I believe it means ladies and men are equal, and so every kind of sexual discrimination should be eradicated.”

“그건 인권 차원에서 당연한 거 아니야?”

“Isn’t that solely pure from simply from a human rights perspective although [So a feminist one isn’t necessary]?”

친구는 페미니즘의 방향에는 동의하면서도 페미니스트에 대해서는 부정적 생각을 가진 듯했다. 친구는 내게 “너의 정체성을 어느 하나로 규정하지 않길 바란다” “역차별당하고 있다고 주장하는 2030 남성들의 이야기도 귀담아들어달라”는 말을 남겼다.

Though my good friend agreed with the overall course of feminism, he appeared to harbor unfavorable ideas about feminists themselves. He continued, “I hope you don’t outline your identification as simply this one factor,” and “Please hearken to the tales of males of their 20s and 30s who declare they’re being reverse discriminated.”

최근 게임 업계에서 일하는 여성 작가들을 향해 잇따르고 있는 ‘페미니즘 사상 검증’ 사태를 지켜보면서 당시 대화를 떠올린 건, 페미니스트를 옥죄는 사회 분위기가 전방위적이라는 생각 때문이었다. 친구의 질문 의도가 ‘사상 검증’일 것이라곤 생각하지 않는다. 다만, 이런 질문이 나와 동등한 위치에 선 사람의 ‘순수한 궁금증’에서 비롯된 것이 아니라 누군가를 검열하고, 억누르고, 일자리를 겨냥하고 있다면 말은 달라진다.

Whereas watching the latest ‘feminist verify’ [lit., ‘verification of feminist ideology’] that has been going down in opposition to feminine writers working within the recreation business, I remembered the dialog at the moment as a result of I believed that the social ambiance that oppresses feminists is omnipresent. I don’t suppose the intention of my good friend’s query [was malicious], to substantiate that I used to be a feminist [and then target me on that basis]. Nonetheless, if these questions don’t come up from a spot of real curiosity [and willingness to engage in dialogue] expressed by an individual standing on equal footing with me, however as a substitute is a type of sealioning geared toward censoring, suppressing, or concentrating on somebody’s job, the story is completely different.

지난달 말 남초 사이트와 게임 업체 넥슨이 한 행동은 전형적인 ‘사상 검증’이었다. 남초 커뮤니티는 넥슨의 게임 ‘메이플스토리’ 홍보 영상에 등장하는 캐릭터의 손가락 모양을 두고 ‘남성 혐오’라고 주장했다. 근거는 빈약했다. 해당 영상을 작업한 하청 업체의 한 여성 직원이 자신의 사회관계망서비스 계정에 올린 페미니즘 옹호 발언이 전부였다. 전형적인 확증 편향이었지만 넥슨은 별다른 사실관계 확인 없이 해당 영상을 비공개하고 업체 쪽에 법적 대응을 예고했다.

On the finish of final month, the actions taken by the manosphere websites and boards, after which the sport firm Nexon’s responses, had been a typical instance of the feminist verify course of. The manosphere claimed that the form of the finger of the character showing within the promotional video for Nexon’s recreation *MapleStory* was ‘man-hating.’ However the proof was really fairly weak. A feminine worker of the subcontractor who labored on the video uploaded it to her social networking service account, and all she mentioned was her protection of feminism. It was a typical affirmation bias, however Nexon made the video non-public with out verifying the details and introduced authorized motion in opposition to the subcontractor she labored for?

이후 해당 작업물을 그린 이는 40대 남성 애니메이터라는 사실이 보도됐다. 주장의 근거가 사라졌으니, 남초 커뮤니티가 사과했을까. 아니다. 애초 사실 여부는 중요하지 않다는 듯, ‘언론의 보도가 거짓’이라거나 ‘남페미는 문제가 아니냐’며 방향을 틀었다. 그사이 해당 여성 직원은 개인 신상 정보가 털리고 온갖 욕설을 듣는 등 사이버불링을 당했다.

Nonetheless, it was later reported that the one who drew the work was really a male animator in his 40s. Now that the idea for the declare has disappeared, did the manosphere apologize? By no means. Within the first place, it appeared as if it didn’t matter whether or not it was true or not. After which they modified course by saying, “The media’s studies had been false,” or “Aren’t male feminists the true drawback right here?” In the meantime, the feminine worker suffered cyberbullying, together with having her private info stolen and receiving every kind of abusive language.

퓰리처상을 받은 영국의 저널리스트 제임스 볼은 책 ‘개소리는 어떻게 세상을 정복했는가’에서 ‘진실이든 거짓이든 신경 쓰지 않는 사람들이 만들어내는 그럴싸한 허구의 담론’을 ‘개소리’(bullshit)라고 말했다. 개소리꾼의 개소리는 거짓말과 달리 자신이 원하는 결과를 얻기 위해 최소한의 진실조차 중요하지 않기에 거짓말보다 해롭고, 팩트로 대응해도 힘을 잃지 않는다고 했다.

In his guide Publish-Fact: How Bullshit Conquered the World (2021), Pulitzer Prize-winning British journalist James Ball mentioned that ‘bullshit’ is “a specious fictional discourse created by individuals who don’t care whether or not it’s true or false.” He mentioned that not like lies, this, essentially the most bullshit of bullshits, is extra dangerous than lies as a result of even the minimal quantity of reality isn’t vital to realize the outcomes one needs, and it doesn’t lose its energy even whether it is responded to with details.

“업장에서 왜 사회운동을 하냐”(허은아 국민의힘 의원), “악질적인 점은 실수가 아니라 의도적이라는 데 있다”(이상헌 더불어민주당 의원), “의도를 가지고 넣었다면 조롱”(류호정 정의당 의원)이라는 정치인들의 반응은 ‘개소리’ 기세를 더 강화할 뿐이었다. 정치권의 메시지는 ‘사상 검증을 하지 말라’ ‘페미니스트가 뭐가 문제냐’여야 했다. 기업은 개소리꾼의 개소리를 수용할 것이 아니라 무시해야 했다. 언론은 ‘집게손 논란’이라는 제목으로 개소리를 앞다퉈 보도하지 말아야 했다.

The politicians’ responses—“Why are you partaking in social actions at your office?” (Individuals Energy Occasion Rep. Heo Eun-ah), “The malicious level isn’t that it was a mistake, however that it was intentional” (Democratic Occasion Rep. Lee Sang-heon), “If it was put in with intention, it will be ridiculed” (Justice Occasion Rep. Ryu Ho-jeong)—solely added to the bullshit’s momentum. As an alternative, the message from the political world ought to have been, “Don’t interact in a feminist verify,” and “What’s the issue with feminists anyway?” Corporations ought to have ignored this bullshit of bullshits, not blindly accepted it, and the media mustn’t have rushed to report it beneath the title ‘Claw Hand Controversy.’

‘페미니스트는 남성 혐오론자이기 때문에 그런 집게손가락 모양을 넣었을 것’이라는 ‘개소리 담론’에 기업, 정치인, 언론 등이 동조한 결과는 ‘일터를 잃는 노동자’다. 2016년 ‘소녀에게 왕자는 필요 없다’는 글이 쓰인 티셔츠를 입었다는 이유로 교체된 성우처럼, 과거 에스엔에스에 페미니즘 관련 글을 올렸다는 이유로 2023년에 계약 해지된 게임 ‘림버스 컴퍼니’의 그림작가처럼 말이다.

Supply: Twitter/@KNKNOKU by way of BBC.

The results of corporations, politicians, media, and so forth agreeing with the bullshit discourse, that “feminists will need to have put that index finger image as a result of they’re male haters,” is employees shedding their jobs. Identical to the voice actor who was changed in 2016 for sporting a T-shirt with the phrases “Women don’t want a prince” written on it, the illustrator of the sport Limbus Firm whose contract was terminated in 2023 for [retweeting tweets that used derogatory terms for men].

개소리를 하며 ‘사상 검증’을 정당화하는 이들에게 말해주자. 너희 주장은 개소리라고. 페미니즘이 뭐가 문제냐고. 너희들이 페미니즘을 알긴 아느냐고.

Let’s inform those that spew bullshit within the identify of feminist checks: Your arguments are bullshit. What’s the issue with feminism anyway? Do you guys even know *something* about feminism? (END)

(For extra info, in chronological order over November to December, together with the response of the Nexon Union, please see the Korea JoongAng Daily, this Reddit thread, Korea Bizwire, the Korea Instances, and once more the Korea JoongAng Every day.)

Now quick ahead to mid-January 2024, when a number of media retailers reported that within the identify of gender equality, the federal government was instantly changing the ‘male’ pictogram in a number of the emergency exit indicators nationwide with extra clearly ‘feminine’ ones. Some retailers added that it was on the behest of ladies’s teams.

I’m positive I don’t want to stipulate the absurdities of such a plan. Nor that (most of) the a number of, eminently justifiable criticisms, didn’t essentially stem from misogyny.

However as a rule, feminists turned the goal anyway.

As a result of at greatest, the brand new design was really simply considered one of many potentialities thought-about for updating the indicators, to exchange the prevailing ones solely as per wanted (so, no further value in any respect). Whereas at worst—and it’s unclear which applies, frankly—it was a whole fabrication of the media.

As had been the supposed ladies’s teams that had been demanding it:

직장인 A씨(29)는 “새 픽토그램을 보니 긴 머리에 치마를 입고 가슴 부분이 튀어나와 있었다”며 “여성 중에 이런 기호를 원하는 사람이 실제로 얼마나 되겠냐. 오히려 여성을 희화화한 듯하다”라고 말했다. 한 누리꾼은 “누군가 일부러 논란을 만들었다고 생각될 정도”라고 했다.

한 여성단체 관계자는 “어떤 기사에선 ‘여성단체 등이 요구해왔기 때문’이란 식으로 설명했던데, 그런 요구를 한 단체가 어디에 있나. 괴담 수준의 터무니없는 얘기”라며 “오히려 성 고정관념을 고착화하는 그림이다”라고 비판했다. (Kyunghyang Shinmun)

Workplace employee A (29) mentioned, “Once I regarded on the new pictogram, I noticed her with lengthy hair and a skirt and her breasts protruding,” including, “What number of ladies really need this image? “Actually, it looks as if a caricature of ladies.” One netizen mentioned, “It virtually makes you suppose somebody created controversy on goal.”

An official from a ladies’s group mentioned, “In some articles, it was defined as ‘as a result of ladies’s teams have been making calls for,’ however the place is the group that made such calls for?” “It’s an absurd story on the degree of a ghost story,” he criticized, including, “Fairly, it’s a image that perpetuates gender stereotypes.”

And from the Dailian:

…”이런 것도 성별 갈라치기 소재로 쓰냐” 라는 등 비판 의견이 쏟아졌다.

…[Netizens] mentioned “Is that this simply one other factor that can be utilized to divide the sexes?”

Picture sources: 스포츠하국, Pixabay (edited).

Now, you may rightfully argue that the media was accountable in that case, not technically the manosphere.

Solely, there’s a substantial amount of synergy between the 2.

Essential context is that the notoriously clickbaity Korean media is one of many least trusted within the (developed) world, and that it’s closely male-dominated. Add that Korea is a deeply patriarchal nation, at present within the midst of a polarizing “gender conflict,” then a continuing backlash of ‘journalists’ scapegoating feminists for all Korea’s ills is all too predictable.

The deceit concerned could be staggeringly blatant and apparent. I’ve even caught out with one bullshit story myself. When, after ‘reporting’ on a actually non-existent controversy over Berry Good member Johyun‘s cosplay above, then getting the sought-after infected response from the manosphere, the media added insult to damage by blaming your entire controversy on the studies of a single feminine reporter, who criticized Johyun for her overexposure regardless of praising male nudity in earlier articles.

Solely, her article on Johyun wasn’t printed till a number of hours after information about in regards to the controversy first appeared. (And satirically, her article wasn’t in any respect prefer it was described; in reality, they it was simply as clickbaity as everybody else’s, and supplied no foundation to label her a feminist.)

Sources: MLBPark (1; since deleted); 2)

However nonetheless: these three instances alone are inadequate proof of systematic misogyny by Korean journalists and the media. I do strongly suspect although, {that a} thorough investigation by teachers, media-watchdogs, and/or feminist teams will undoubtedly reveal that such an agenda exists. Possible, many such investigations have already been performed, so I’ll comply with this put up up with these at a later date.

Within the meantime, Korean or in any other case, I’ll by no means, ever belief any information supply that makes claims about unnamed ladies’s and feminist teams.

As a part of my very own 2024 agenda although, I attempt to spotlight the optimistic the place I can, and might’t finish on that be aware.

So, with my apologies for the crappy high quality of my digital digicam again within the late-2000s, lastly let me remind you of when, in a bid to problem antiquated gender roles and encourage extra equitable childcare between mother and father, subway-caregiver indicators with a feminine determine had been regularly changed with an androgynous one. They had been solely changed as per wanted, in order that they didn’t value more money, leaving even essentially the most vitriolic of incels struggling to oppose them with out exposing their misogyny. Which might be why I haven’t really seen one with a feminine caregiver ever since.

Solely, doing my due diligence, I’m sorry to report that right now I realized my expertise isn’t in any respect common (not to mention my nonexistent expertise of feminine areas). That the initiative stalled, and that as of 2019, many Seoul subway stations nonetheless have virtually fully feminine caregivers of their indicators. Most satirically and symbolically maybe, in Gangnam Station, the place 100% of them are of ladies:

Supply: Hankook Ilbo.

So, the struggle continues, even over the little issues. However it does proceed.

Associated Posts:

If you happen to reside in South Korea, you may donate by way of wire switch: Turnbull James Edward (Kookmin Financial institution/국민은행, 563401-01-214324)