Title of Document:THE CONSTRUCTION OF U.S. CAMPTOWN PROSTITUTION IN SOUTH KOREA: TRANS/FORMATION AND RESISTANCE
Na Young Lee, Ph.D., 2006
Directed By: Professor Seung-kyung Kim Department of Women’s Studies
This dissertation examines the historical construction and transformation of
U.S. camptown prostitution (kijich’on prostitution) in South Korea. Wrought by Japanese colonialism, U.S. military occupation, national division, and the Korean War, camptown prostitution has been historically constructed and reconstructed within a complex web of dynamic power relations between/among nation-states, subjects, and NGOs. This is a study of U.S. camptown prostitution, however, which is not just about military prostitution. Rather, it is a study of the power dynamics inherent in the material basis and the discursive formations that make the phenomenon, kijich’on prostitution, substantial. As such, this study analyzes the multiple intersections of structures of power that constitute the kijich’on.
The purpose of this study is 1) to provide a geneology to explain the socio-historical phases of camptown prostitution, 2) to gauge the impacts of inter-state relations, U.S. military policy, and (inter)national policies on the kijich’on and kijich’on prostitution, 3) to trace the roles and activities of Korean NGOs and women’s organizations with regard to kijich’on prostitution, and finally 4) to understand the triangular relationship among the nation-states, women subjects, and movement organizations in (re)constructing kijich’on prostitution as both material reality and symbolic metaphor. Thus, the research questions at the center of this dissertation are directed towards four themes: historicizing kijich’on prostitution, understanding the role of the nation-states and NGOs in the process of construction and transformation of the kijich’on, deconstructing the policies that have impacted kijich’on prostitution and the women’s movement against kijich’on prostitution. In order to answer these questions, this study employs multiple methods of gathering information and analysis, including archival research, participant observation, in-depth interviews, and textual analysis.
Utilizing gender as a crucial analytical category, this dissertation contributes not only to an understanding of camptown prostitution, but also to the theoretical conceptualization of military prostitution, feminist radical theories of gender, race, and nation, and the trans/national feminist movements.
THE CONSTRUCTION OF U.S. CAMPTOWN PROSTITUTION IN SOUTHKOREA: TRANS/FORMATION AND RESISTANCE
Na Young Lee
Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of theUniversity of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofDoctor of Philosophy2006
Professor Seung-kyung Kim, Chair Professor Claire Moses Professor Deborah Rosenfelt Professor Shawn Parry-Giles Professor Linda Aldoory
c Copyright by Na Young Lee 2006
I dedicate this dissertation to my parents, Park Jin Lee and Jong Sun Byun, who have been my lifelong supporters and believers. This dissertation is also dedicated to my two sons, Myung Joon Moon and Sang Joon Moon, who have been my joy, hope, and life.
This dissertation would not have been possible without the many women who helped me in my long journey to become a feminist scholar. First and foremost, I would like to thank the women working inside/outside U.S. camptowns in South Korea who shared their stories with me. Although I cannot name them individually, I would like to express my deep gratitude to them.
The M.A. program in Women’s Studies at Silla University, Korea, provided an opportunity for me to read a broad range of feminist texts. The Program also gave me an opportunity to learn how to become a feminist teacher: I would not have been able to teach an Introduction to Women’s Studies course during my third year at the University of Maryland without the teaching experience that I gained in Korea. I am grateful to Dr. Ki-sook Lee who encouraged me to continue my doctoral study, and who has been supportive throughout my graduate career in the U.S.
Over the past five years while I have been a graduate student in the Department of Women’s Studies at the University of Maryland, I have been blessed with kind friends, supportive colleagues, and generous teachers. From the first day of class to the day of my dissertation defense, everyone in the Department has always been most generous with their time, advice, and support. First, I would like to thank the members of my committee, Dr. Seung-kyung Kim, Dr. Claire Moses, Dr. Deborah Rosenfelt, Dr. Shawn Parry-Giles, and Dr. Linda Aldoory for their unending care, valuable input, and constructive advice for this dissertation. They have both my gratitude and my deepest respect. I owe the most gratitude to my mentor and dissertation advisor Dr. Seung-kyung Kim. Since the beginning my study in the U.S., she has shared with me my frustration, sorrow, and small victories. Dr. Kim has been standing beside me as I have matured as a student, researcher, and writer; she has always been there with endless encouragement, generosity, and love. My special thanks go to Dr. Claire Moses for her guidance and support for this dissertation, and my intellectual growth. Her warm-hearted words of encouragement helped me overcome my frustration during the dissertation writing. I would also like to thank Dr. Deborah Rosenfelt for always providing encouragement and advice whenever I needed.
I owe much to all faculty, graduate students, and staff members in the department of Women’s Studies at the University of Maryland that provided me with a generous, encouraging, and supportive intellectual home. The Professors in Women’s Studies. Dr. Bonnie Thornton Dill, Dr. Lynn Bolles, Dr. Elsa Barkley Brown, Dr. Katie King, and Dr. Ruth Zambrana. have guided me to be a good feminist teacher, researcher, and activist. Without their intellectual help and emotional support, this dissertation would not have been brought to life. My journey would not have been possible without the community of graduate students at the University of Maryland. So many friends have been encouraging and supportive while I struggled to survive in U.S academia. My gratitude goes to Laura Logie, Heather Relllihan, Joy Sapinoso, Ayu Saraswati, Nikki Stewart, and Sarah Tillery who helped me navigate the first year graduate school. I would also like to thank my colleagues, Vrushali Patil, Robyn Allison Epstein, and Kimberlee Staking who have been great friends. This dissertation has benefited greatly from valuable theoretical conversations with them. My special thanks goes to Kimberly Williams not only for her generous friendship but also for her detailed comments on and endless editing of this dissertation. I would also like to thank Laura Nichols, Annie Carter, and Cliffornia Howard for making my graduate school years a smooth experience. I would like to thank the College of Arts and Humanities for providing the Mary Savage Snouffer Dissertation Fellowship which made it possible for me to finish writing in one year.
I would also like to share a moment of joy with my compatriots who have gone through hard times with me as international graduate students in the United States. They are my sisters and brothers. Yukyung Yeo, Ghada Al-Madbouh, Seong-hun Yun, Heshin Yun, and Jaekwon Suh.
Finally, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my parents, Park Jin Lee and Jong Sun Byun, who have lived with me, and my children in the U.S. in order for me to concentrate on my study. Five years is a long period to be away from Korea even if it is for their daughter’s study. Without their sacrifice, it would not have been possible for me to finish my study and my dissertation this fast. My sons, Myung Joon and Sang Joon, have supported my intellectual journey with great understanding that makes me proud of, and I would like to thank them.
Table of Contents
Dedication ...........................................................................................................iiAcknowledgements............................................................................................iiiList of Pictures...................................................................................................ixList of Tables and Figures................................................................................xiiiList of Abbreviations and Glossary.................................................................xiv
Chapter 1. Introduction................................................................................. 1
1.1 Reflection: Detour but Useful Journey ................................................... 1
1.2 Sociopolitical Context............................................................................. 6
1.3 Historical Context ................................................................................... 9
1.4 Research Questions...............................................................................13
1.5 Feminist Epistemology, Methodology, and Methods...........................14
1.5.1 Overview of the Research Process .............................................. 16
1.5.2 Participant Observation and In-depth Interviews ........................ 18
1.5.3 Archival Research and Textual Analysis.....................................24
1.6 Dissertation Overview ......................................................................... 29
Chapter 2. Conversations with Theories of Military Prostitution, Gendered
Nationalism Globalization, and Postcolonial Feminist Perspectives
on Trans/National Politics.......................................................... 32
2.1 Theories on Prostitution and Military Prostitution ............................... 32
2.1.1 Feminist Approaches to Prostitution............................................ 33
2.1.2 The Study of Kijich’on Prostitution: Going beyond Theories on Military Prostitution................................................................ 35
2.2. Nationalism and Gender ...................................................................... 41
2.2.1 Theorization of Gendered Nationalism........................................ 41
2.2.2 Korea’s Nationalism and Feminist Challenge ............................. 43
2.3 Theories of Globalization ..................................................................... 48
2.3.1 Androcentric Conceptualization of Globalization ....................... 49
2.3.2 Gendered Globalization and Global (Re)Structuring .................. 52
2.4 Postcolonial Feminist Theories and Trans/national Feminist Politics..52
2.4.1 Postcolonial Feminist Theories on Otherization.......................... 52
2.4.2 For Trans/National Feminist Politics...........................................57
Chapter 3. Emergence of Military Prostitution: Colonial Legacies and the U.S. Military Occupation in South Korea (before the 1950s) ............... 62
3.1 Historical Roots: Japanese Colonization and Construction of Prostitution
3.1.1 Trans/Im/planting Licensed Prostitution...................................... 63
3.1.2 Legacies of Japan’s Prostitution System...................................... 67
3.2 Korea under the U.S. Army Military Government ............................... 73
3.2.1 U.S. Occupation at the Dawn of Liberation................................. 73
3.2.2 Establishment of the Women’s Bureau: Propaganda of Gender Equality........................................................................................78
3.3 Emergence of U.S. Military Prostitution .............................................. 82
3.3.1 Regulation of Prostitution for U.S. Soldiers’ Security and Health.. ......................................................................................................82
3.1.2 Abolition of Licensed Prostitution under the Name of Liberal Democracy...................................................................................88
3.1.2 Post-Abolition: Intensified Combat against VD..........................94
Chapter 4. Consolidation of Kijich’on in Support of National Security and Economic Growth (the 1950s through the 1970s) ................. 103
4.1 Warfare Efficiency and Control over Prostitutes: The Korean War (1950-1953).........................................................................................104
4.2 Spread of Military Prostitution and Public Anxiety about Boundaries: Postwar Period (1954-1960) ............................................................... 108
4.2.1 Legacies of the Korean War ...................................................... 108
4.2.2 Tacit Permission of Military Prostitution for Survival .............. 111
4.2.3 Anxiety about Boundaries.......................................................... 113
4.2.4 Separation and Differentiation...................................................116
4.3 Consolidation of Military Camptown Prostitution: Abolition vs. systematic Regulation (1960-1970) ............................. 118
4.3.1 The Prostitution Prevention Law and Special Districts ............. 119
4.3.2 The Tourism Promotion Law and the Korean American Friendship Society..................................................... 122
4.3.3 Heyday of Kijich’on................................................................... 124
4.4 Social Purification and Tight Control over Kijich’on for the Sake of National Security, Economic Development, and the Yushin Regime (1970-1980)................................................... 125
4.4.1 The Nixon Doctrine and the Anxiety of National Security ....... 126
4.4.2 The Camptown Purification Movement and VD Control.......... 129
4.4.3 October Yushin and Justification of the Authoritarian Regime: Kijich’on Subject to Social Cleansing......................... 131
4.5 Women in Military Prostitution: A Comparative Analysis ................ 139
4.5.1 Military Prostitutes in the 1950s and 1960s: Autonomy and Spirit of Resistance ............................................................. 139
4.5.2 Kijich’on Women in the 1970s: Harsh Control, Losing Autonomyand Hope......................................................143
Chapter 5. The Kijich’on Movement and Gendered Nationalism: Emergence, Conflict, and Negotiation (the 1980s-1990s).................................149
5.1 The New Authoritarian Regime and Its Policy on Prostitution..........149
5.2 Emergence of the Women’s Movement against Kijich’on Prostitution..........................................................................................154
5.2.1 Aspirations of Democratization and Gendered Movements......154
5.2.2 Emergence of the Kijich’on Movement.....................................156
5.2.3 Rupture: Christianity vs. Nationalism........................................161
5.3 Gendered Nationalism, Anti-Americanism, and Women’s Rights.....167
5.3.1 Anti-American Nationalism.......................................................167
5.3.2 Yanggongju: Ambivalent Allegory of the Nation......................170
5.3.3 Second Rupture: the Anti-American Movement and Women’s Rights as Human Rights ....................................174
5.4 Women in Kijich’on: Continuity and Change ....................................177
Chapter 6. Trans/Formation of Kijich’on: Transnational Prostitutes and Changes in Politics.................................................................185
6.1 Emergence of New Strangers..............................................................187
6.1.1 Decrease in Koreans ..................................................................187
6.1.2 Korea’s Globalization and Migration Policy.............................188
6.1.3 Interplay of Philippine National Interests and Gender Ideology..................................................................193
6.2 Janus-faced U.S. Policy ....................................................................196
6.2.1 Drives for Anti-Trafficking as the International Police.............196
6.2.2 Audacious Repudiation and the Zero-Tolerance Policy............200
6.2.3 Reiterated Discourses of Soldiers’ Health and Liberal Democracy..............................................................204
6.3 Paradox of Koreans...........................................................................208
6.3.1 Racism Interlocked with Gendered Ideology ...........................208
6.3.2 Nationalist Paradox....................................................................211
6.4 Growth, Achievements, and Limits of the Kijich’on Movement......214
6.4.1 Growth and Empowerment........................................................214
6.4.2 Dilemmas of the Kijich’on Movement: Limited Perspectives and Reiterated Ideologies...........................................................217
Chapter 7. Conclusion: Towards Trans/National Feminist Politics................ 225 Implications for Trans/National Feminist Politics....................................230
Appendix ....................................................................................................... 236 Bibliography ................................................................................................... 237
List of Tables and Figures
Table 1. U.S. Military Bases and Prostitutes in Northern Ky.nggi Province ..12 Table 2. Ratio of Increase & Nationality of Prostitutes
in four major kijich’on ......................................................................193 Table 3. U.S. Camptowns and Bases in South Korea in 2006........................206 Figure 1. Number of E-6 Visa Holders ..........................................................191 Figure 2. Nationality of E-6 Visa Holders in 2003.........................................191 Figure 3. Foreign Female E-6 and C-3 Visa Holders (July 2003)..................191
List of Abbreviations and Glossary
AALPAssociation for Abolition of Licensed Prostitution
AFPACAllied Forces Pacific Area Command
CNMCommittee of Nog.llri to Maehyangri
DOSUnited States Department of State
IOMInternational Organization for Migration
JCMWKJoint Committee of Migrant Workers in Korea
KAFSKorean American Friendship Society
KCIAKorean Central Intelligence Agency
KCPTPan-South Korea Solution Committee against U.S. Base Extension in Pyeongtaek
KCWUKorean Church Women United
KITCKorea International Tourism Corporation
KNTOKorea National Tourism Organization
KSTAKorea Special Tourism Association
KWAUKorean Women’s Associations United
KWDIKorean Women’s Development Institute
MOGEMinistry of Gender Equality in South Korea
MOGEFMinistry of Gender Equality & Family in South Korea
ROKA Republic of Korea Army
SKIGSouth Korean Interim Government
SKNCSouth Korean National Constabulary
SKILASouth Korean Interim Legislative Assembly
STASpecial Tourism Association
URAWOUnited Relief Association of Women’s Organizations
USAFIKUnited States Armed Forces in Korea
USAMGIKUnited States Army Military Government in Korea
USFKUnited States Forces in Korea
Chong-Dae-Hyup: A representative organization of the chongsindae movement.
Durebang (My Sister’s Place): One of the most influential women’s organizations regarding camptown prostitution.
Hansori (One Voice): An umbrella organization of women’s organizations engaged in the anti-prostitution movement.
National Campaign: National Campaign for Eradication of Crimes by U.S. Troops in Korea.
Saeumto (Sprouting Land): Another influential women’s organization regarding camptown prostitution.
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1. Reflection: Detour but Useful Journey
It was summer of 2004 when I started my first day as a volunteer worker at Durebang in South Korea. Durebang, or My Sister’s Place, is one of the most influential women’s organizations regarding camptown prostitution in South Korea (hereafter kijich’on prostitution),1 functioning as a community as well as counseling center for women living with, married to, or servicing U.S. soldiers in .ij.ngbu City (2004 Pamphlet of Durebang). I took a subway and had to transfer to a bus to get to the office of Durebang, and it took me around two hours from the center of Seoul. When getting out of the subway station of .ij.ngbu, I was surrounded by the gigantic wall of two U.S bases. They were standing like bulwarks that seemed to protect the entrance of the city and the whole country of South Korea. Walking alongside the long fence, passing two armed U.S. soldiers standing in the main gate of the base, and even taking another bus to get to Durebang, I was being captured by the unexplainable feeling: unavoidable eyes kept tracing and watching me as a stranger. According to one of the residents in .ij.ngbu city, if a woman says she lives there, people living outside .ij.ngbu cast a look at her with a suspicion that she might be a yanggongju (“Western princess”): the dark shadow of the longstanding kijich’on’s image. The curious eyes might suspect the woman in “unconventional” clothes in the kijich’on as a (non)yanggongju.
1 I will use the terms “camptown prostitution” and “military prostitution” interchangeably with “kijich’on prostitution.” The term “U.S. camptowns” is also interchangeably used with kijich’on for this dissertation.
When I arrived at Gosan-dong, the small town in which Durebang is located, another U.S. base, Camp Stanley, blocked my view. The presumably idiosyncratic scene prompted the recognition that it was virtually my first-ever encounter with the
U.S. camp. This was the first recognition of my profound ignorance of camptowns as well as disjuncture between the real context and ideal goal of the dissertation project. This small town was called ppaet-p.l. It originates from bae-bat (pear garden), since the area had once been well known for its fertile pear gardens. But ppaet-p.l is a local nickname of .ij.ngbu camptown, which means a swamp-like area where once entered, it is impossible to escape.2 The ppaet-p.l symbolizes the last home for yanggongju to belong to, which still accommodates 2,000 U.S. soldiers and approximately 100 prostitutes, according to Yu Young Rim, director of Durebang. Durebang was there in the center of ppaet-p.l. I entered the run-down cement building that used to be a government-run health clinic for the purpose of women’s regular checkups of sexually transmitted diseases.
As I got used to the “new” environment and came to know kijich’on women, I was faced with another juncture between myself and camptown prostitutes. Every day I ran into Russian women, Filipinas, and Korean former prostitutes either on the street or in Durebang. Whether their need seemed to be urgent or trivial for me, the “problems” pertaining to pregnancy, abortion, abuse, laundry, legal aid, interpretation as well as translation, and even inquiry for a baby bed, were really necessities for them to survive daily life. In this sense, offering physical, material, legal, and emotional aids to those in need is crucial for Durebang’s activism. Grand discourse,
2 It is also the title of a 1996 novel about camptown life written by Ahn Il Soon (Seoul: Konggan Media)
ideology, or theory was neither useful nor heard. What I could do was just to work as one of the “regular” staff members, going back and forth to a hospital, the city hall, the immigration bureau, and other women’s organizations. At times I had to translate foreign documents into Korean or interpret English into Korean. Locating cheap goods to take care of women’s babies or low-priced lodging places were rather pleasant experiences. It was a process for me to break down my prejudice against military prostitutes, to cross the class boundary, and eventually debunk the presumption of what a “good” feminist researcher is.
The decisive concentration of the fieldwork was my three-day stay in Tongduch’.n in early August, as part of Durebang’s outreach program. I met several Russian and Filipina prostitutes at bars and clubs every night, and I believed that it was time to ask them something for my project with regard to the circumstances that led them to cross national borders and become camptown prostitutes, the material conditions, and the extent of violence. However, on the third night, Natasha (a twenty-two-year old Russian, pseudonym)3 abruptly asked me with drunken voice, “What do you want? I want a real friend, rather than pseudo-friend, who can listen to me and to whom I can talk. But what do you want, Nayoung?” It struck me and resonated through the whole summer. I recognized the significant barrier in the field was not my different identity of class, nationality, or language, but my “murky” intention: to utilize their experiences for my future career. My involvement in the kijich’on was undeniably driven by academic curiosity. It was a recognition that I was about to engage in the politics of representation through my project.
3 All interviewees’ names used in this dissertation are pseudonyms.
It was ironic, given that I had devoted myself to postcolonial feminist perspectives on listening to (Fine 1998), talking with (Lal 1999), and speaking to (Spivak 1988) those Othered in order to critique androcentric and Eurocentric ways of otherization through the politics of representation. It was also ironic that my field had engaged in the theories against Othering and technologies to scrutinize the otherization. But still I was eager to know the Other or to give voice to the Other. According to Sara Ahmed (2000), “[d]ifferences, as markers of power, are not determined in the ‘space’ of the particular or the general, but in the very determination of their historical relation” (8-9). The difference between my own social and material status and that of camptown prostitutes is deeply embedded in Korean history and historical relations between/among Koreans, Americans, prostitutes, and “ordinary” people. Yet, I was convinced that I dared to overcome the difference, the marker of power belonged to me, and that their experiences could be visible by “my feminism.” It was an attempt to universalize the identity of the particular group of prostitutes, which would obscure “the contradictory and contested process by which they have been conceptualized and by which diverse kinds of subject-positions were assigned” (Scott 1999b, 88-89).
I have shared the belief with feminists that women’s experience brings into public discussion questions and concerns excluded in dominant ideologies, and women’s narrating their lived experiences enables us to rethink and rearticulate obscured painful memories (Stone-Mediatore 2000, 120). However, when faced with the “real” and “living,” I became determined to give up the project of making the experience of Others visible “which may reproduce the given ideological systems and its terms” (Scott 1999b, 82-83).4 How dare I understand the detailed tissues of the prostitutes’ daily lives woven through violence, hatred, love, joy, small victories, and negotiations? How dare I/eye analyze their experiences constituted by presumably ambivalent, illogical, and unreadable historicity?
Since then, my focus has shifted from investigating women’s experiences into analyzing productions of the social, economic, and political reality of the kijich’on prostitution as complex, contradictory processes. This experience also provides the foundation of my argument against the idea of a single distinctive feminist method of research. Instead of hanging onto the illusion of a single distinctive feminist method or the time-consuming defense for a distinctive women’s studies methodology, I identify myself as a feminist doing interpretive and interdisciplinary research (Reinharz 1992, 7).5
This is a study of U.S. camptown prostitution, but not just about military prostitution. Rather, it is a study of the power dynamics inherent in offering the material bases as well as the discursive formations that make the phenomenon, kijich’on prostitution, substantial. Chandra Mohanty (1991b) asks feminists to understand and analyze how the intersections of the various systems of domination operate and position women differently at particular historical conjunctures through
4 Although I situate women’s experiences and voices at the core of my research, I had to admit that merely taking experience into account does not reflect on how that experience came to be. As Joan Scott (1998) argues, experience is “not the origin of our explanation, not the authoritative (because seen or felt) evidence that grounds what is known, but rather that which we seek to explain, that about which knowledge is produced” (83). That is, she emphasizes the need to historicize and contextualize experience and the identities it produces. Otherwise, “oppressive systems are replicated rather than criticized in the unquestioning reliance on ‘experience’” (Olsen 1998, 320).5 It is interpretive because I share with feminist researchers the assumption of “intersubjectivity” between researchers and participants (informants), the interest of empowering women, not exploiting women as research ‘subjects,’ and ongoing struggle against the very “I” who would interpret women’s experiences and socio-historical contexts in which women have been (are) situated.
setting up of historically specific “relations of ruling,” and how “dynamic oppositional agency” of individuals and collectives respond to them (14). Drawing on Mohanty, this dissertation analyzes the multiple intersections of structures of power that construct the kijich’on. Rather than positing any simple relation of colonizer and colonized, wrongdoers and victims, or subjects and objects, this project explores the ways in which the kijich’on has been formed and transformed with an emphasis on the process of ruling and resistance.
1.2. Sociopolitical Context
In 2003, the U.S. announced a plan to move most U.S. troops away from the frontline with North Korea towards forty-five miles south of Seoul by 2008. As part of a global review designed to produce a more agile fighting force, the U.S. began a reduction and realignment of U.S. forces in South Korea (Asia and Pacific Rim 8 March, 2005). Due to the change in U.S. military strategy for rapid deployment forces to focus increasingly on anti-terrorism operations, the so-called “Strategic Flexibility,” some 12,500 troops are slated to depart by 2008, leaving 24,500 soldiers in South Korea (The Star 9 March, 2005) (picture 2).6
In fall 2004, a group of prostitutes working predominantly in brothels waged a hunger strike in front of the South Korean national assembly, spreading flyers conveying
6 The war on Iraq temporarily forced a reduction in the number of U.S. troops from 37,500 to 32,500 in 2004 (National Campaign 2006).
their message about “the right to live” and “the right to work” (Hankyoreh 10 October, 2004; Daily Sports 1 October, 2004). In the aftermath of the implementation of an anti-prostitution law in September 2004, they resisted government measures designed to crack down on “traditional brothels” located in red-light districts (i.e. prostitution concentration areas) rather than on covert forms of prostitution such as those arranged in cafes, room-salons, or bars that cater high-class clients. The prostitutes’ protests began in October 2004 and continued well into 2005 (picture 3).
On May 4, 2006, 11,500 uniformed police officers, 2,800 soldiers, and 600 part-time armed workers performed an operation called “Hwangsaeul of Dawn” in Daechu-ri and Dodu-ri in P’y.ngt’aek city in South Korea. Hwangsaeul is a field area where the
U.S. Armed Forces in Korea plans to expand its military bases. The operational targets were farmers and civilians who, intending to continue their livelihoods in P’y.ngt’aek, refused the government order to leave. Armed forces entered the area early in the morning and cracked down on the civilians who had gathered in an elementary school. Within ten hours, 524 civilians were arrested and approximately three hundred were injured. It had been twenty-six years since any military operation had been conducted against civilians in Korea (KCPT 2006) (picture 4).7
From scenes #1 and #3, we can get a glimpse of how Korea’s sovereignty and nationalism are interrelated with U.S. occupation and militarism. Despite the U.S.
7 In 1980, the Korean military proceeded to Kwangju city to quell the protest by thousands of pro-democracy activists of the seizure of power by General Chun Doo Hwan. Known alternatively as the Kwangju massacre or Kwangju Democratization Movement, this incident will be explained in detail in chapter 5.
pledge to reduce its troops within the territorial borders of South Korea, its “commitment to defending” South Korea would not lessen, as a senior defense official with the U.S. military admits, due to advanced modern technology to allow more defense capability of the U.S. with fewer troops (Garamone, 2006). The commitment of the U.S. military to remain in South Korea is evidenced in the third scene of P’y.ngt’aek in which Yongsan garrison in Seoul and the 2nd Infantry Division in Tongduch’.n will be relocated under the name of “Strategic Flexibility” (Hankyoreh 12 June, 2003). The consolidated but more expanded base will occupy approximately 6,560 acres of P’y.ngt’aek, most of which are residential or farming areas (KCPT 2006). And the fact that the Korean government supports the U.S. plan with military suppression of civilian protests supposedly reflects Korea’s vulnerable status in the conflict zone of Northeast Asia, which simultaneously exposes to some extent that Korea is involved in the world competition of militarization. At the same time, divergent opinions and conflicts apparent over the P’y.ngt’aek issues, e.g., confrontation between NGOs and the government, residents and the U.S. and Korean governments, and NGOs and some residents who oppose the first group of NGOs’ protests that allegedly affect local business negatively, fairly mirror the growth of Korea’s economy as well as civil society.8
However, the scenes do not tell any stories about P’y.ngt’aek as one of the biggest and oldest camptowns, which has been notorious for military prostitution
8 Two taxi drivers whom I met in P’y.ngt’aek in November 2004 exemplify opposite perspectives among civilians on the relocation of U.S. troops. One complained that NGO demonstrations would halt the relocation of U.S. troops and negatively impact local businesses. He labeled NGO protestors ungrateful for what the U.S. had done for Korea. On the contrary, the other taxi driver opposed the consolidation of U.S. troops into P’y.ngt’aek, which would cause the growth of the sex industry there, and eventually distort the regional economy and damage its reputation as well.
throughout Korea’s modern history.9 The city is constituted by several villages including Songt’an, Anj.ng-ri, and Sinjang-dong adjoining Osan Air Base and Camp Humphreys, around which brothels, bars, and clubs are congregated. Although the living means of those working at brothels, bars, and clubs is solely reliant on the existence of U.S. soldiers, the issue of prostitutes’ relocation has not been raised by either Korean nationalist NGOs or by the government. And the ambivalent judiciary measures taken against prostitution that have never reached the U.S. occupying spaces has also not been questioned.
My dissertation launches from these three seemingly discrete, un/related, and/or contradictory scenes, attending to the junction where three subjects (e.g. nation-states, NGOs, and women) encounter each other as crucial actors that cut across time and space, finally meeting at the imagined and material site of U.S. camptown prostitution (kijich’on prostitution), which represents the U.S. military occupation over Korea, underlies Korean peoples’ resistance to U.S. imperialism, and constitutes prostitutes’ daily lives.10
1.3. Historical Context
9 P’y.ngt’aek is a symbol of Korea’s modern history, e.g., the invasion of foreign forces in Korea. The military facilities in P’y.ngt’aek, which had been built by the Japanese military after World War I, were greatly expanded after the U.S. military government took over control from the Japanese in 1945. The military compound and its outlying areas encompassed 3,708 acres in 2006 (Pan-South Korea Solution Committee against U.S. Base Extension in P’y.ngt’aek (KCPT), 2006). 10 The term “prostitute” is used in this dissertation to refer to women who sell sex for money, as it is a more comprehensive and historically embedded term, free from any specific interest. At times, however, the term “sex workers” is used in order to highlight the location of those engaged in the sex industry as working people. For further discussion of the idea of “sex worker” that is related to other income-generating activities for women in patriarchal capitalistic societies, see Kamala Kempadoo and Jo Doezema (1998).
The history of U.S. military presence in South Korea began in September 1945 when the 24th Army Corps, consisting of some 70,000 soldiers, and led by General John R. Hodge arrived to transfer power from the Japanese colonial empire. Since then, the presence of American soldiers along with military bases has been an ongoing feature of Korean society. The number of U.S. bases and military facilities has fluctuated and is dependent upon what counts as a military base, when it is investigated, and by whom. It is also hard to know the exact number, as the existence of some military installations remains top secret. According to a Korean NGO, 101 military facilities, including fifty camps, occupy the Korean territory like a complex map (National Campaign for Eradication of Crimes by U.S. Troops in Korea 2005; http://www.usacrime.or.kr/).11 The land used by the U.S. forces covers 6,770 thousand pyeongs (one pyeong equals 3.3 square meters). As of 2004, there were ninety-four U.S. military facilities (DacuInfo 2004, 10) and in 2006, twenty-nine main bases were officially identified (USFK, 2006).12 Despite the change in the number of facilities as the political atmosphere has changed over time, U.S. troops in South Korea had historically numbered no less than 35,000 until the early 2000s. Given that the U.S. had over 730 military installations and military bases in over fifty
11 According to the Base Structure Report released by DoD in 2004, the total number of bases is 101 occupying 59.976 acres (24,271 ha) (http://usacrime.or.kr/). The Department of Defense in Korea report of 2002 noted a total of 92 bases and 24,617 ha.12 According to the Global Security Organization, U.S. forces in 2000 in Korea are scattered across forty-one troop installations, and an additional fifty-five small camps and support sites. Similarly, a military officer of the U.S. 8th Army identified ninety facilities related to the U.S. troops in South Korea [in 2000]. They involve forty-one main bases, thirty-eight military communication installations and eleven training camps (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/korea-intro.htm).
countries around the world in 2003 (picture 5), and Korea technically remains in a state of war,13 the number of bases may not be so striking (Global Security 2006).14
Camptowns have developed around the main U.S. bases such as P’y.ngt’aek, P’aju, Tongduch’.n, and .ij.ngbu. They are usually commercial districts of small villages solely dependent on a U.S. military customer base, filled with clubs, bars, convenience stores, pawnshops, barbershops, tailor shops, photo and portrait shops, and drug stores. Particularly, the heavy concentration of clubs, bars, and brothels catering to GIs who rest and recreate during off-duty hours encourages the construction of small villages into the kijich’on: the web of the military-dependent economy.
According to a 2001 report by Korean NGOs, twenty-two out of thirty-four
U.S. military bases are located only in Ky.nggi Province alone, around which most camptowns have been developed (Saeumto 2001b, 77; KWAU 2002a, 5) (picture 6). Camptowns in the Northern Ky.nggi Province are concentrated in four cities including Tongduch’.n, P’y.ngt’aek, P’aju, and .ij.ngbu, where 44.9 percent of the prostitution areas and 61.4 percent of prostitutes out of those in Ky.nggi Province are located (Saeumto 2001b, 63).15
13 Because the Korean War ended in a cease-fire and not a peace treaty, the Korean peninsula is still under the armistice agreement signed by North Korea, China, the Soviet Union, and the United States in 1953 right after the Korean War.14 U.S. military bases will be reorganized into twenty-three by 2011 (http://usacrime.or.kr/). But it does not mean an absolute reduction in troop numbers, but instead, consolidation in a fewer number of locations for a more agile fighting force (Stars and Stripes 17 July, 2001). 15 In fact, the number of prostitutes reaches 10.9 percent of the total population of Ky.nggi Province (ibid.).
Region (City) No. of Bases Name of Bases Nature Names of Kijich’on No. of Bars No. of Prostitutes Tongduch’.n 4 Camp Casey Camp Hovey 2 ID Gyangam-dong 9 116 Camp Nimble Camp Castle Bosan-dong 58 496 .ij.ngbu 8 Camp Kyle Camp Essayons Camp Red Cloud Camp Sears Camp Stanley 2 ID Ganeung-dong 5 67 Camp Jackson Camp La Guardia Camp Falling H2O Gosan-dong 13 154 P’aju 2 Camp Gary Ownes Camp Giant 2 ID Sunuri 4 18 P’y.ngt’aek 2 Osan Air Base Air Sinjang-dong 56 526 Camp Humphreys Force Anj.ng-ri 27 192 Total 16 7 172 1,569
Area I Tongduch’.n Camp Casey, Camp Castle, Camp Hovey, Camp Mobile, Camp Nimble
.ij.ngbu Camp Essayons, Camp Jackson, Camp Kyle, Camp Red Cloud, Camp Sears, Camp Stanley
Area II Hanam Camp Colbern
Bup’ung Camp Market
Seoul Yongsan (Garrison)
Area III Wonju Camp Eagle, Camp Long
P’y.ngt’aek Camp Huphreys
Suwon Air Base
Area IV Waegwan Camp Carroll
Daegu Camp Henry, Camp Walker, Air Base
Busan Camp Hialeah
Gwangju Air Base
Area V Osan Air Base
Area VI Kunsan Air Base
Area VII Chinhae Navy Base
(Resource from the USFK, www.korea.army.mil in 2006) 206
checks do not amount to management of prostitution (The Pressroom of USFK, Information Center 3 December 2004). Army Col. Anthony R. Lerardi, the 2nd Infantry Division Chief of Staff, insisted that “these inspections are intended to preserve the health and safety of our soldiers and are not related to the issue of Human Trafficking & Prostitution.”243
It is obvious, however, that if there were no prostitution, entertainers would not be subject to these health inspections. It is not a secret that foreign women employed in clubs or bars in U.S. military camptowns receive regular health examinations, including an HIV test every three months, at designated clinics (Korea Church Women United Counseling Center for Migrant Women Workers 1999; Saeumto 2001b, 133), and Korean NGOs have been aware that VD medications have been distributed by the USFK to kijich’on prostitutes (KWAU 2002).
The hypocritical attitude of the U.S. military coincides with the rationale that “good” U.S. soldiers come to South Korea in order to protect the Korean people and “to protect democracy” from an “axis of evil” that includes North Korea, in the name of “world peace.”244 As such, the position of the U.S. as a nation of “freedom,” “justice,” and “democracy” becomes differentiated from the “injustice” and “oppression” levied by “other” nations and “other” citizens. This trope justifies the perceived U.S. right to intervene in Korean policy under the name of universal human rights and democracy. In other words, with the references of Others (South or North Korea), the superior place of the Self (the U.S.) is reconfirmed. The differentiation of
243 He added that the division is absolutely committed to this zero-tolerance culture for activities that support human trafficking and prostitution, noting that “we are not tolerating anything that supports that” (ibid.).244 These quoted phrases are actually used by some U.S. soldiers in Korea in interviews with a journal (Quoted in The Time 12 August, 2002).
“self” or “our nation” from “Other” nations is applicable to the international politics of the U.S. As Inderpal Grewal (1998) points out, positioning America as the site for the authoritative condemnation of practices conducted in/by the Third World has long been part of the U.S. government’s political strategy. Such a strategy has not only functioned to consolidate the U.S. as the “land of freedom” whose representatives can stand in “judgment of the practice of other nation-states” (Grewal 1998, 511), but has also justified the expansion of U.S. imperial power to intervene in domestic policies of other nations. Accordingly, the U.S. government is concerned about the transnational traffic in women, this so-called “Third World women’s issue,” only because it fits into U.S. colonialist national narratives.
6.3. Paradox of Koreans
The transformation of kijich’on not only reveals the discourse of U.S. imperialism and its hypocritical policies, but also Korea’s racism, nationalism, and colonialism. This part examines how Korea’s sexism, racism, and nationalism are inextricably linked in order to maintain kijich’on as reality and symbol despite its various changes in atmosphere.
6.3.1. Racism Interlocked with Gendered Ideology
From a Korean perspective, foreign prostitutes are conceived as, at best, “poor victims of sexual exploitation,” and, at worst, “voluntary sex workers greedy for dollars” (Weekly Hankyoreh 27 March 1997, 64-68). Either way, they are treated as mere sexual and material objects, in part as a result of racial bias.245 Koreans do not pay attention to their working capabilities but to “physical attraction” (ibid.). Because of their assigned and embodied exotic otherness, foreign prostitutes are regarded as “lustful sex objects,” born with “strong sexual desires” (MOGE 2003, 150), and treated as “overseas imports” or “cheap sexual labor” coming from “poor countries” (Mal Magazine May 1999).246 Moreover, many Koreans believe that foreign prostitutes are necessary not only as reserve forces for Korea’s sex industry but also as decoys to keep U.S. forces away from “our” “innocent” women. They are welcomed to serve as buffers between undesirable wants of GIs, protecting the more valued greater Korean society (Castro 2003, 20).
Alternatively, the primary reason that pimps/bar owners prefer Filipinas to Koreans is economic; Filipinas are paid $ 400-500 a month, while Korean prostitutes are paid over $1,500 a month.247 Filipinas’ ability to communicate in English is as important as their willingness to accept lower wages, because this can tempt American soldiers into spending more money in camptowns (IOM 2002, 46). Moreover, as bar owners became aware that Filipina prostitutes were favored by many U.S. GIs as “submissive Asian women who are docile and small enough for lap dancing with proficiency in English” (Kim H 2003, 77), the demand for importing
245 According to a research, Korean men seem to prefer Russian women to Filipinas based upon racialbias, e.g. white Russian women are deemed to be “clean,” “active,” “progressive,” or “independent” (Ministry of Gender Equality (MOGE) 2003, 147-48).246 The idea of overseas imports is sometimes linked to that of “foreign currency drain” (Baek 2000,108). Many Koreans, including bar owners, think that the importation foreign prostitutes is inevitableto make up for a shortage of labor, but they are simultaneously concerned about currency drain. “I feelsorry that foreign prostitutes brining their pockets with the U.S. dollars and sending them to theircountries of origin. You know, Filipinas usually have big families to support, so they are eager to cometo Korea to earn dollars. They are wiring all their money to the Philippines instead of spending here”(interview with a motel owner in Tongduch’.n October 2004).247 Russians are paid about $460 a month and Filipinas about $410 a month on average (MOGE 2003,
them increased.248 The president of KSTA (Korea Special Tourism Association), on a television show, asked the government to import foreign women not as “entertainers” but as “prostitutes” to reduce business costs (Baek 2000, 104).
Vulnerability is a hidden but significant factor in the demand for foreign prostitutes. Because of their unfamiliarity with Korean language, laws, and cultural environment, foreign prostitutes are more easily exploited, deceived, manipulated, and threatened by Korean employers, with practices such as hidden fees and forced savings that deprive them of contracted salaries, often making them into “indentured servants,” or “sex slaves” (Castro 2003, 20).249 Frequent physical as well as verbal abuse against foreign women has become a major problem as Korea’s patriarchal perception of woman intertwines with racism. In fact, foreign prostitutes in kijich’on who experienced violence testify that 97.5 percent of violence is carried out by Koreans such as bar owners, customers, and managers; this reality differs from the general assumption that crimes against kijich’on prostitutes are mostly conducted by
U.S. soldiers (MOGE 2003, 117). Further, it is very hard for women who are undocumented to escape abusive jobs, since they are subject to unwanted deportation as immigration violators. Even when their visas are still legally effective, they are considered criminals because they have violated the domestic prostitution law. As criminals, foreign prostitutes are liable to be fined and even held in detention centers until fines are paid (Durebang 2004, 57; IOM 2002, 47).
248 Some researchers have indicated that a prevalent sexual desire among soldiers for “submissive,” “innocent,” “naive,” “small,” and “exotic” Asian women caused the strong demand for foreign prostitutes in the U.S. military camptowns (Baek 2000, 110; Castro 2003, 20).249 They are more exposed to intimidation into compliance with pressure to provide sexual servicesthan local Korean women (IOM 2002, 46).
6.3.2. Nationalist Paradox
When the women in kijich’on changed from “ours” to “others,” the discourses of human rights eclipse those of anti-militarism and anti-imperialism; subsequently Korean male activists lost their interest in kijich’on prostitutes. This shift resulted partly because these Korean men are aware that other Korean men, as clients, traders, or bar owners, are deeply involved in the trafficking of foreign women, and also because foreign sex workers cannot provide Korean nationalists with a rhetorical tool to criticize U.S. imperialism. Their indifferent attitude towards prostitutes changes, however, when crimes against Korean women are reported. For example, in June 2002, a U.S. armored tank ran over two Korean middle-school girls in the city of Yangju. This incident re-ignited the anti-U.S. movement throughout the nation, mobilizing hundreds of thousands of people in anti-U.S. rallies generally known as the peaceful candlelight demonstration, which lasted into the next year. Korean nationalists were eagerly interested in the case, since two of “our” “national” “pure” girls were “killed” by the U.S. imperialists (Ky.nghyang Ilbo 13 June, 2006; Ohmynews 12 June, 2006; 1 January, 2003; 27 December, 2002; Dong-a Ilbo 31 December, 2002; 29 December, 2002). For them, the death of the girls, who rhetorically embody national dignity and the future of Korea, signified national collective suffering. They took on this issue as an opportunity to reform the unequal SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement).
Indeed, ethnocentric nationalism that enabled the critiques of U.S. militarism and imperialism has long been the dominant theoretical approach to military prostitution among Korea’s NGOs (National Campaign 1999; 2002; 2003; Korea Truth Commission 2002), as discussed in the previous chapter. Progressive social activists have criticized the U.S. troops stationed in Korea as symbols of national disgrace and barriers to unification of the two Koreas. These activists regard U.S. military camptowns as evidence of political domination by the U.S. and of the neocolonialist relationship between two nations. The crucial target of Korean nationalists’ critique, therefore, has been the symbol of U.S. militarism and imperialism concerning “our” national sovereignty, e.g. SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement), not “others.” 250
The Korean media’s response to the lawsuit filed by Filipina prostitutes typifies such underlying dimensions of Korea’s nationalism, racism, and colonialism. When the lawsuit arose, the Korean media’s attention focused merely on recovering national honor from this “international dishonor.” The titles of newspaper articles, such as “Developed Nation/Underdeveloped Human Rights,” “International Shame,” “Possible Diplomatic Conflicts,” and “Responsibility of Government to Control,” all symbolize Korean nationalist anxiety concerning its reputation as a “developed,” “democratic” country. Filipina prostitutes were depicted either as voluntary sex workers coming to Korea to earn money, or as helpless victims of sexual exploitation by U.S. soldiers (Hankyoreh 20 October 2002; Dong-a Ilbo 21 October 2002; MBC
250 One of the main goals of nationalist activism is to revise the unequal agreement between the U.S. and Korean governments: the Mutual Defense Treaty signed by both Korean and U.S. governments in 1953 immediately after the Korean War and updated by the 1967 SOFA. Based upon this treaty, about 37,000 U.S. troops were stationed in Korea in 2001, Korean territory for U.S. bases has been provided indefinitely with no obligation on the part of the U.S. to pay for it, and U.S. soldiers have been able to avoid criminal prosecution for crimes, including violent crimes, committed against local people in Korea. According to the Korean National Assembly’s report, U.S. military personnel have committed 50,086 crimes against Korean civilians since 1945. These include murders, brutal rapes and sexual abuse, arson, theft, smuggling, fraud, traffic offenses, and an outflow of PX merchandise on to a black market in U.S. goods. These crimes by U.S. military personnel are usually not brought to trial in local courts. In 1999, only 20 cases (3.56 percent) were handled in Korean courts out of 565 criminal cases involving U.S. military personnel (The Annual Report of the Korean National Assembly 2000).
News 21 October 2002; Dong-a Weekly 12 December 2002). For the media, national honor is a question of which masculine government controls women’s bodies and sexuality.251
The depiction of Filipinas as “imported” “helpless” “victims” seems to soothe the public, by provoking sympathetic sentiments. However, an object of pity requiring protection can easily be resituated as that of danger to be controlled and supervised. In fact, the growing demand for foreign prostitutes in the sex industry is generally acknowledged as a sign of the growth of immoral and illegal practices within Korea, in conjunction with concerns about the public morality (Chosun Ilbo 2001; Korea Herald 2001 quoted in IOM 2002, 11).252 The idea of degeneration through biological or psychological disease and contagion has often served to construct sexual, bodily, class, racial, and national boundaries in colonial discourse (McClintock 1995, 48). In this sense, Koreans’ perception of foreign prostitutes, who should be both protected and controlled, legitimated the strengthening of particular national boundaries. Beneath the attitude of a benefactor who is willing to support the victimized poor women, the deceived and exploited, lies the logic of a continuous otherization, e.g., “my” nation can be acknowledged as “good” enough to be willing to “protect” “helpless” “other” women. As such, Korea can reclaim its authority to secure and control the women’s bodies, which has safeguarded not only male sexual
251 For example, one editor of a magazine argues that “what is clear from the lawsuit process so far, the Korean government did not play a key role to rescue and protect the victims of trafficking… Ministry of Labor and the Ministry of Culture and Tourism should be in charge of controlling and supervising the Filipinas” (Hankyoreh 21 31 October 2002). 252 For example, the Korean Center of Human Rights for Foreign Workers (2002) states, “the foreign women mostly engaging in the sex industry in Korea are severely exploited in terms of human rights” (emphasis mine). While reporting on the “real picture of the severely abused women,” however, the organization reveals anxiety that “Korean people might be influenced by corrupted hedonism” (Korean Center of Human Rights for Foreign Workers 15 May 2002).
interests and practices, but also Korea’s patriarchal interests to constitute and maintain kijich’on, leaving its complicity with U.S. imperialism out of the explicit discourse.
6.4. Growth, Achievements, and Limits of the Kijich’on Movement
6.4.1. Growth and Empowerment
Two feminist NGOs that have been involved in attempts to halt kijich’on prostitution, Durebang (My Sister’s Place) and Saeumto (Sprouting Land), became visible and empowered in light of the public recognition of the kijich’on movement organizations as well as kijich’on prostitution. In time, they became stabile organizations thanks to the government financial assistance; and they built a strong coalition of several women NGOs; then coalition produced increasing number of policy papers, reports, and other documents regarding kijich’on.
The kijich’on movement, which Durebang and Saeumto represent, has had some significant success in bringing kijich’on prostitution and prostitutes into public consciousness. Beginning in the 1990s, the vigorous activism of the kijich’on movement has been featured to the press in conjunction with the increased public attention to kijich’on, particularly after the tragic death of Yun K.m Yi in 1992 (Kukmin Ilbo 17 May, 1995; Ky.nghyang Ilbo 30 May, 1995; Chosun Ilbo 5 September, 1995; Segye Ilbo 19 September 1995; Hankyoreh 28 April, 1996; 20 June 1998; 24 February, 2003; 3 March, 2003; Kukmin Ilbo 8 June, 1998; Women’s News 20 December, 2002; 2 May 2003; Dong-a Ilbo 20 December, 2003). The theoretical scope of the kijich’on movement activism can be summarized as follows: first, to offer direct aid to those in need both psychologically and materially; second, to publicize the material conditions of women in kijich’on; third, to challenge existing patriarchal perceptions through a revisioning of kijich’on prostitution from personal to structural, systematic, and social; and fourth, to deconstruct the stereotypical image of kijich’on prostitutes as social pariahs as well as to reconstruct their identity as victims. 253 Specifically, they successfully replaced the terms of “fallen women,” “trash,” “Western princess (yanggongju),” or “Western whore (yanggalbo)” with “sex slaves,” “deceived or exploited victims,” “abused women,” and/or “our poor sisters,” which have now circulated sufficiently to become the settled archetypes of women in prostitution (Saeumto 1996; 1999; 2001b; 2001b; Durebang 1995; 2001; 2004; 2005).
In addition, the kijich’on movement and the prostitution movement converged, in tandem with the problematization of prostitution and human trafficking, in public discourse. Confronted with the increased presence of transnational prostitutes in kijich’on since the mid-1990s, Durebang and Saeumto have joined several other NGOs working with migrant workers in order to urge the Korean government to pay closer attention to the issues of transnational prostitutes and to implement preventive measures of trafficking as well as protective means to aid trafficking victims (Saeumto and Human Rights Solidarity for Woman and Migration in Korea 2001; KCWU 2002; Durebang 2003). In 2000, a series of fires occurred in
253 The theoretical scope of feminist understandings of prostitution ranges from “questioning androcentric patriarchal culture” to “revealing the exploitative sex industry” (W.n 2004, 42). With efforts to remove the social stigma attached to “prostituted” women, feminists have reconceptualized prostitution to equate women’s oppression with slavery under patriarchy (Won 1999; Hansori 2003; Kim H. 2004; Chung 2003). This focus on the experiences of oppressed women, extends beyond the dichotomy of forced vs. voluntary, and has contributed to thinking about prostitutes as “victims of the system of gender discrimination,” “victims of gender and sexual politics,” and “victims of the sex industry” (W.n 2004, 36-44).
several brothels, which resulted in the deaths of many prostitutes. In response to these events, women’s organizations became united under the leadership of the Hansori (One Voice), the umbrella organization of women’s organizations engaged in the anti-prostitution movement, whose co-director was Yu Young Nim, head of Durebang, and staged huge protests against prostitution.254 Women activists of Durebang and Saeumto organized successive seminars addressing the plight of prostitutes and demonstrations on the street as well as conducted projects to publicize the issues of transnational prostitutes in kijich’on (KWAU 2002a; 2002b).
In the meantime, the U.S. report placing Korea in Tier 3 was released in July 2001; the Filipina lawsuit occurred in October 2001; and in 2004 feminist NGOs, under the leadership of the kijich’on movement, were successful in their pressure to pass a new anti-prostitution law. Kim Hyun Sun, director of Saeumto, played a bridge role between women NGOs and the Ministry of Gender and Equality to negotiate between NGOs aspirations and the administratiion’s perspectives on prostitution (interview with Kim Hyun Sun in August 2005; interview with Cho Jin Kyung in October 2004).
The seemingly gender-friendly government could no longer ignore women NGOs’ demand for a new anti-prostitution law. Despite the huge amount of economic profit produced by the sex industry,255 domestic as well as international pressure, including the pressure exercised by the U.S. over the Korean government, enabled the
254 Most significantly, a fire in Daemyung-dong, Kunsan in September 2000 ignited feminist anger and finally led to feminist coalition and unity. It was discovered that five victims were in confinement like slaves, struggling with violence and exploitation. See Ch.ng (2003) for the detailed information regarding the incident.255 The sex industry in South Korea, including legal entertainment associated with the sex trade, accounts for more than $20 billion each year (Stars and Stripes 2 March 2005). If illegal ventures are considered, the estimate may be as high as $100 billion (KICJP 2002).
implementation of the Anti-Prostitution Law in March 2004.256 Ironically, hypocritical attitudes toward prostitution, e.g. “pretending not to be involved in prostitution,” facilitated the quick passage of the bill by the National Assembly. As one leading activist confessed, feminist activists did not expect that “the bill would be passed so quickly and implemented within a year” (interview with Cho Jin Kyung in October, 2004; Yu Young Nim in October, 2004). It seems to be very hard for the (mostly male) members of the Assembly to obviously oppose the bill, because they are concerned about women’s voting power and they do not want to be called “wrongdoers” toward the “victims” of prostitution.
6.4.2. Dilemmas of the kijich’on movement: Limited Perspectives and Reiterated Ideologies
The enactment of the law can be recognized as a feminist victory. Ironically, however, the limits and dilemmas of women’s organizations became evident when the feminist victory was widely recognized in conjunction with the emergence of transnational prostitutes in kijich’on.
The implementation of the law seemed to result in the empowerment of women’s organizations, but in reality, the law expanded the government’s power over women’s organizations. By implementing the law under the women’s NGOs initiatives, the Korean government achieved two goals: to meet the U.S. standard
256 The Law is composed of two Acts, “Act on the Prevention of Prostitution and Protection of Victims Thereof” and “Act on the Punishment of Procuring Prostitution and Associated Acts.” Significant differences with the existing law include (1) women who are forced to or involuntarily involved in prostitution would be categorized as victims to be rescued and protected; (2) anyone convicted of engaging in human trafficking for the sex trade requires a mandatory three-year prison sentence; and (3), the government can confiscate all proceeds and property earned through the illegal sex trade and at the same time, it should take charge of sex/gender education for civilians, victims, and criminals (Lee
N. 2005, 42-43).
regarding human trafficking, satisfying the U.S. call for government assistance for trafficking victims or for NGOs involved in assisting trafficking victims; and to satisfy NGO’s request for attention to issues regarding the status of sex workers. While executing government-funded projects, particularly assisted by the Ministry of Gender Equality established in 2001, on the contrary, women’s organizations were co-opted by the government and lost their original aspiration for an autonomous women’s movement (Yun 2004, 66-67; Cho 2004, 52). The inclusion of feminist activist aspirations and perspectives within the state can contribute to “progressive legislative measures and policies for women,” but only if accompanied by an increase in “lobbying from moderate feminist groups and grassroots pressure from radical feminist outside the state” (Bae 2004, 43). As some feminists have warned, however, legal reforms, without vigorous cultural reform, have not been sufficient to achieve women’s equality (Cho 2000; quoted ibid., 44). Likewise, without radical change in patriarchal, militarist, and imperialist notions of, as well as practice toward, women legal changes cannot guarantee improvement in the lives of women in kijich’on.
In effect, despite the call by activists for complete change in the social conception of military prostitutes, the kijich’on movement retained a traditional understanding of acceptable female sexual behavior through the notion of “victimization.” Because women in kijich’on have been isolated from Korean consciousness, living ghettoized lives removed from “normal” Korean society, visualization of women’s daily plight including various forms of abuse, violence, and exploitation as tangible realities, and “conditions facing prostitutes in U.S. military camptowns” seemed most important and urgent (Saeumto 1996; 1999). The strategy of victimization was necessary to explain why women in kijich’on “rarely venture into what they call ‘normal’ Korean society” and why they are suffering from a “severe sense of pariah status” (Moon, K. 1999, 313), and to redirect the social perception of kijich’on from personal problems, to social biases and systematic structures (Saeumto 1996; 1999; 2001b; 2001b; Durebang 1995; 2001). Women can be repositioned as innocent victims of severe material conditions by strategic interpellation,257 which necessarily accompanies sympathetic sentimentalism.258 For example, one of activists confessed after watching the documentary film I and Awl, which was made and screened by Durebang in 2004, “My heart aches. I felt pain and sorrow on hearing such disastrous experiences of cruel oppression and violence against our innocent sisters, victims of U.S. militarism. I burst into tears with them with such intolerable empathic feelings” (from a brochure of I and Awl).
It is understandable that innocence, enslaved status, and sexual abuse must be underscored in order to appeal to the public. It is also necessary to highlight women’s stories of extreme deprivation, needing to support their impoverished families or victims of family abuse, in order to resituate kijich’on women as “appropriate victims” and to induce public sympathy (Saeumto 1995; 1996; 1999; Durebang 1999; 2003; 2004; 2005). Nonetheless, even if these images of poor, helpless, exploited victims enhanced the legitimacy of the claims of women organizations, this rhetoric also deprived the prostitutes themselves of agency. The essentialization of women as passive victims, ultimately, justifies and reiterates masculinist/patriarchal nationalist
257 This term originates from Louis Althusser (1971), who discusses how subjects come into being through the ideological function of interpellation. Althusser posits that subjectivity is constituted and determined through acts of misconception that is called interpellation or hailing.258 Most common phrases used in documents, brochures, and data produced by the kijich’on movement are “our poor sisters,” “victims of patriarchy, nation, militarism, or imperialism.”
discourse concerning women: “Our” women should be protected by “our” brave warriors from “other” men, predators, exploiters, invaders, or colonizers. Further, when the discourse of victimization is coupled with morality, it may function to re-stigmatize women. In a personal interview, one counselor told me, “poor sisters now need to escape here, after recognizing prostitution as a shameful experience.” If prostitutes are really innocent victims of sexual violence, why do they need to feel shameful for their behavior? If one considers this a shameful experience, to acknowledge women’s voluntary consent is a prerequisite. Thus, to feminist NGOs of the anti-prostitution movement, prostitution is a form of sexual exploitation or patriarchal crime, and to the kijich’on movement, it is a crime specific to the U.S. military and the effects of U.S. imperialism.259 Murders, brutal rapes and sexual abuse were highlighted with other crimes committed by U.S. soldiers including theft, smuggling, traffic offenses, and a black-market in U.S. goods (Kirk 1995, 12).
Following this logic, all forms of trafficking and transnational prostitution are inherently coerced and abusive and constitute violence against women, which must be eradicated. As targeting trafficking for prostitution becomes the principal agenda of anti-trafficking interventions, policies, and laws, Korean feminists began to address all events involving immigrant women with anti-trafficking and anti-prostitution discourses.
259 In general, feminist activists in the anti-prostitution movement have emphasized that prostitution equals “male violence,” which can be defined as “violation of women’s rights” (Cho J. 2003, 31), and because its inherent nature of trafficking (Kim H. 2002; 2003; Cho J. 2003, 56; Cho Y. 2003, 95), it is a “crime” causing serious physical as well as psychological symptoms in the “victims” (KWAU, 2002a, 69). Activists of the kijich’on movement added one component to it: crime against Korean women committed by the U.S. military personnel (Ahn 1995, 13-25; Cho 1995, 35; Kirk 1995, 12).
This is not to imply that there is anything inherently wrong with the NGOs’ perspectives or to demean their efforts to help or support individual prostitutes. Indeed, there is nothing wrong with favoring one idea over others or focusing on one issue over others. The process may be necessary to make some tasks more manageable. Such simplification of ideas has been useful for NGOs that want to fit into state policy and be allowed into the state’s governing circle. It has also been helpful for prostitutes in getting public recognition. However, it is problematic when the essentialized discourse of women’s passivity is included in “official” discourses in conjunction with unquestioned patriarchal, nationalist, and imperialist assumptions of gender and sexuality. It is also problematic when alternative perspectives are systematically blocked, ignored, or emotionally resisted by institutionalized knowledge and settled discourse within a feminist arena. When there is an official frame or “master narrative,” the complex dimensions of the varied causes of the issue are isolated, separated, and simplified without room for variation, overlap, or considerations of social contexts (Lerum 1999, 24-25). Among feminists and feminist NGOs, therefore, different perspectives on prostitution have simply not been permitted, other than the abolitionist view (Lee N. 2005; Shon 2004; Kim H. 2004).
Without the notion of “work” or “labor,”260 it is very hard to understand transnational prostitutes’ experiences in relation to other sexualized and gendered income-generating activities that women perform in patriarchal capitalistic societies across national borders.261 One is apt to ignore questions of which complex
260 When I visited one feminist organization in winter 2004, for example, and used the term “sex work,” members of the NGO got angry with me. They expressed huge hostility against using the term “sex work,” and then argued that “prostitution cannot be regarded as ‘work.’”261 For further discussion of the notion of work and sex to understand prostitution in Korea, see Lee,
conditions cause women’s transnational displacement, differing positioning, and transnational labor movement. The diverse experiences of transnational prostitutes do not, except for the most abusive situations, garner attention or interest, which signals the current hegemonic discursive frameworks within the Korean public.
More seriously, feminist activists have to confront prostitutes’ own act of resistance and the division among them. Because it is difficult to monitor diversified, pervasive, and underground forms of prostitution, such as those carried out in (sports) massage parlors, room-salons, karaokes, or hotels, visible brothels located in red-light districts (so-called prostitution or sex trafficking concentration areas) became the main target of suppression and “crack downs.” Targeting “nine sex trafficking concentration areas” was the original plan for the Ministry of Gender Equality with the cooperation of women’s organizations, as this would most easily demonstrate successful outcomes of the new law, making possible clams like “Korea’s sex trafficking prevention policy has become world class” (Ministry of Gender Equality and Family 2005). In response, groups of prostitutes working in brothels performed hunger strikes in front of the National Assembly for several months beginning in December 2004 through 2005, arguing for “the right to live” and “the right to work” (Hankyoreh 10 October, 2004; Daily Sports 1 October, 2004), as briefly discussed in the introduction chapter. They expressed severe hostility towards feminist NGOs as well as the Ministry of Gender Equality, pointing out that “to demonstrate visible outcomes, feminist NGOs funded by the Ministry of Gender Equality and the police seem to be targeting women working in traditional brothels, who are most underprivileged, the lowest class among prostitutes. We need to work for a living. Do
Na Young (2005).
they have the right to stop us from working? For what?” (interview with a leader of the strikes in December 2004). Additionally, foreign “victims” with no legal alternatives cannot benefit from the new law. Once they report any crimes or violations, they are forced to leave the country; unlike other workers, they have no flexible period after their E-6 visa expires (Seoul Ilbo 13 September, 2005; Hankyoreh 25 March, 2005).
Lastly, as Durebang and Saeumto became leaders of the women’s movement against prostitution, concentrating their activities on domestic prostitution and sex trafficking, paradoxically, they lost sight of the original aspiration of the kijich’on movement. In the process of building a coalition of women’s organizations in the anti-prostitution movement to make the new law possible, the kijich’on movement had to blur the specificity of kijich’on. As such, the kijich’on movement’s call for understanding the complex problems of Korean patriarchy and nationalism, the division of the nation, U.S. militarism and imperialism, and the domestic sex industry, which constitute the reality and symbol of kijich’on, became nullified. And the issues of kijich’on became as simplified as those of the domestic sex industry. Is it really possible for kijich’on to be eradicated with the shift of the domestic entertainment spheres? Can kijich’on be eliminated once prostitution is abolished? Or, can problems pertaining to kijich’on disappear once the U.S. military leaves? Nothing was questioned and could be answered in this regard.
It is time to reconsider Korean feminist basic assumptions of sex, gender, race, and labor and redirect their activism in a way to retain the radical feminist aspiration and resistance against patriarchy, military, nationalism, and imperialism which in effect have constituted the allegory of woman as endless poor victim. It is also worth noting that military prostitutes’ direct voices have been lessening in the public sphere as women’s organizations’ power has been increasing. If women activists in the kijich’on movement have been successful in hearing voices from the periphery and speaking for other others, it is the time to let them, kijich’on prostitutes, speak for themselves.262
262 One of the former military prostitutes and my informant, Kim Y.n-ja, established and run an independent center in 2003, H.imang Nanum Center in Py.ngt’aek. Making Korean traditional cookies for financial assistance for former prostitutes, she hopes the center will function to distribute the hopes for a better future to former kijich’on prostitutes and their Amerasian children, independent of the government and other movement organizations.
Chapter 7: Conclusion: Towards Trans/National Feminist Politics
When I visited .ij.ngbu City, a U.S. camptown, in summer 2004, I was quite certain about what I wanted to do for my dissertation research. I was armed with various postcolonial theories that would help me listen to, talk with, and speak to camptown prostitutes. those Othered.in order to represent the lives of women “correctly.” Surely, I thought, as a Korean feminist, that I should be able to represent the harsh every day realities of the kijich’on prostitutes and their experiences. I was ready to critique androcentric and Eurocentric ways of otherization by presenting my “authentic” representation of the vexed lives of the women.
My initial plan to write about and tell the stories of the kijich’on prostitutes and their experiences was overturned quickly when I realized that my presumed authentic insider status was, at best, a “fictional” one. I did not have a ready answer when a Russian prostitute asked me what it was that I wanted from her and other prostitutes. Furthermore, the stories that I heard from them were the “every day stuff” related to camptown life from finding a baby bed to locating a doctor who could perform an abortion. In the midst of these stories and doing things that I was asked to do, I came to a realization that the lives of kijich’on prostitutes were much more complex than those that I envisioned representing. I also had to confront that my need to tell their stories as “victims” was fraught with my own understanding of
U.S. camptown and kijich’on prostitution. I did not want to undertake a study of different peoples, institutions, and cultures for the sake of “our” desire to understand “them” better, nor did I want to homogenize them into a singular category of sympathetic victims of imperial militaristic patriarchy.
Thus, when faced with the “real” and “living,” I decided to give up the project of making the experience of Others visible, embracing Scott’s caution not to “reproduce the given ideological systems and its terms” (Scott 1999b, 82-83). My focus, since then, has shifted from investigating women’s experiences into analyzing productions of the social, economic, and political reality of the kijich’on prostitution as complex, contradictory processes. As such, this dissertation does not attempt a rich/in-depth description of the lives of kijich’on prostitutes, research that remains to be done.
The central questions addressed in this dissertation are how/why camptown prostitution emerges, consolidates, and transforms; what the involvement of the nation states are in the process; and how Korean nationals, camptown prostitutes, and women’s organizations function. Shaped by Japanese colonialism, U.S. military occupation, national division, and the Korean War, camptown prostitution has been historically constructed and reconstructed, rather than being deconstructed as situated in the complex web of dynamic power relations between/among nation-states, subjects, and NGOs.
The history of military prostitution started with Korea’s subordination to Japan. The foundations of two major features of kijich’on lie in Japan’s licensing of prostitution: red-light districts as a commercialized space with brothels and a government-controlled registration system with compulsory venereal disease examinations. Moreover, through its state-regulated system of prostitution, Imperial Japan systematically, strategically, and collectively abused Korean women’s sexuality as sexual objects of their soldiers, comfort women.
The U.S. military government in South Korea (1945-48) outlawed the licensed prostitution system in the name of liberal democracy and gender equality. However, regardless of the official U.S. stance, prostitution system for the U.S. military in Korea was encouraged with the remains of Japan’s colonial infrastructures, and U.S. military camptowns were established in former Japanese military bases or facilities. Because Korean prostitutes were seen as conduits of VD, concerns about the health of
soldiers led to the continued control over prostitution, through various controlling apparatuses, including VD councils, VD Control Section, regular VD examinations, issuance of certificates to prostitutes, and the operation of enlisted men’s clubs inside military bases. As a result, legal prohibition of prostitution coexisted with a kind of regulated prostitution, ostensibly to protect the health of American soldiers. Therefore, the U.S. military policy to manage sexual needs of its troops who were separated from their families (e.g. families accompany soldiers to Germany, but not to Korea.), complicit with the Korean government, create, consolidate, and maintain camptowns in South Korea. As the Korean government began to conceptualize prostitution as a necessary means to entertain and thus retain foreign soldiers in the midst of an anticommunist war and, later, as a means of ensuring South Korea’s national security during the cold war, the increased concentration of prostitutes within and around the Rest & Recreation facilities eventually developed into so-called “camptown prostitution.” As such, the Korean government successfully ghettoized kijich’on as buffering zones or walls blocking
Americans from entering Korean society and prohibiting normal Koreans from interacting with Americans, and laid the “problems” of camptown prostitution at the
On the other hand, when the Korea’s democratization movement was at its peak in the mid-1980s resisting against the military regime, some women’s groups, Christian women and student movement activists, came together to address the issues of camptown prostitution. The kijich’on movement successfully replaced the terms and notions of “fallen women,” “trash,” “Western princess (yanggongju),” or “Western whore (yanggalbo)” with “sex slaves,” “deceived or exploited victims,” “abused women,” “sacrificial lambs” and/or “our poor sisters. However, the kijich’on movement was faced with an androcentric nationalism driven by anti-Americanism, which was arbitrarily utilizing camptown women’s experience in the name of national pride and sovereignty. Once murdered by U.S. soldiers, the “dirty trash,” yanggalbo (Western whore), who had never before belonged to the national community, became idolized as the “nation’s soul” and national daughter. For Korean nationalists, a woman’s body sexually violated by other nationals signified no less than a suffering nation and lack of sovereignty and independence for Korea as a nation. Therefore, kijich’on woman’s body was utilized as evidence of the immoral, violent, and abusive imperial Other. These conflicts with Korean nationalism have the kijich’on movement to be more engaged in women’s rights and domestic prostitution with recognition of the limitations of nationalist approaches to kijich’on problems. As such, Korean activists in kijich’on developed feminist consciousness.
As military prostitution was consolidated in specific geographical areas
separated from ordinary residential areas and systematically organized as an integral part of national security and economic development, women in camptowns became increasingly subject to collective control, losing autonomy. In addition, in the process of Korea’s national development and democratization, the status of women in kijich’on becomes increasingly downgraded, and as the activist voices of kijich’on women began to speak out for themselves, kijich’on women’s voices became more faded. However, women in camptowns were neither helpless victims nor ignorant poor women. They were capable of agency to organize collective resistance against their stigmatized and pathologized identity such as carrier of venereal diseases, comfort woman, yellow toilet, Western whore (yanggalbo), Western princess (yanggongju), dirty trash, and/or parasite, even when these involved taking considerable risks. Developing diverse survival skills, including leading protests against discriminatory treatment and exploitation of U.S. soldiers, pimps, and Korean nationals, organizing self-reliance groups, and planning escape from the oppressive community and nation, women in camptowns have carved out spaces for themselves.
Since the mid-1990s, the kijich’on has confronted another significant change as foreign prostitutes as cheaper labor have replaced local Korean women. Interestingly, when the women in U.S. camptowns change from “ours” to “others,” the discourses of human rights eclipse those of militarism, nationalism, and imperialism that have led the anti-American movement among Korean civilians since the 1980s. Beside the growing presence of these foreign women, camptowns have faced “redeployment” of U.S. troops as part of a global review designed to produce a more agile fighting force, which resulted in realignment of camptowns as well as relocation of prostitutes. I argue that although the politics of kijich’on seems to be changed on the surface, the U.S. rhetoric of safety as well as security of U.S. soldiers continues by (re)situating women’s bodies as sources of crimes and insecurity. Korean nationalist paradox of racism intertwined with gender ideology against exotic Others, and Korean feminist presumption of sex, gender, race, and labor became more visible.
Implications for Trans/National Feminist Politics
Navigating the conjuncture and disjuncture between prescription and practice of hegemonic powers associated with kijich’on prostitution, this dissertation proves that the kijich’on has never been fixed as a singular socio-political entity. It has been (is) shifting and is always under construction. It can only be temporally fixed within the circumstances of continued conflicts, clashes, negotiations, and reconciliations and between/among the nation-states, the Korean people, kijich’on prostitutes, and NGOs. In this regard, I argue that the theoretical framework of the trans/national is necessary to understand the politics of kijich’on prostitution, which indicates both connection and disconnection, as well as continuity and change pertaining to the kijich’on across time and space. It also refers to contingency as well as inevitability, contradiction as well as consensus, tension as well as reconciliation, and disjunction as well as conjunction between/among the key actors in re/de/constructing the kijich’on.
From the outset, the kijich’on has been transnational as it has interacted with international power dynamics and policies, transnational capitalism, subjects’ encountering others, and women’s movements across national borders. But it is trans/national in that kijich’on prostitution is (has been) an outcome of the contradictory relationships between/among different nation-states, e.g., the colonial state of Japan, the U.S., and South Korea, and some ideas, ideologies, materials, and subjects pertaining to the kijich’on cannot cut across the national boundaries. In addition, the term signifies the trans/formative nature of the kijich’on. Regardless of the state reforms that were driven by the desire for foreign currency or insurance for the national security, the kijich’on has retained the fundamental structure of government-regulated prostitution while reiterating across time and space the attendant underlying ideologies of gender, sexuality, and nation.
Women subjects in the kijich’on are also trans/national. Their encounters with foreign soldiers represent transgression of the androcentric Korean society as well as Korea’s ethnocentric nationalism. Their embodied hybridity interrupts Korean tradition by interlocking it with Western culture and signifies their positionality as belonging neither to Korea nor to America. Unlike the colonized male subject who had nothing but to give in or emphasize the rupture from his own origins, e.g., family, ethnicity, country, and culture, in order to prove the extent of his assimilation (Fanon 1967, 36), woman in kijich’on has kept her complex positionality located at the interstices of assimilation and the negation of her national/ethnic origins. That is evident in the way camptown prostitutes are labeled, neither coherently nor consistently. The un-fixedness of a kijich’on woman as one signifier (e.g., temptress, carrier of venereal diseases, wianbu, yanggalbo, yanggongju, personal ambassador, dirty trash, imperial victim, sacrificial lamb, and/or poor sister) paradoxically reveals the ruptures between/among hegemonic power relationships.
Trans also implies the trans/formative conditions and identities of transnational prostitutes in the kijich’on, as crossing national and cultural boundaries. When they seek other opportunities for a better future, they confront the shifts in material condition, cultural identity, and legal status, which leads to the discrimination, maltreatment, and violence that, combined, represent the continuity of ideologies of gender, race, and nation across borders.
Trans also represents my concern and experience as a feminist researcher about how to encounter, to hear, and/or speak to kijich’on prostitutes. To encounter and listen to different women in terms of culture, nation, race, and class inevitably involves translation of cultural contexts, ideas, and languages. It is a process of trans/lation, because something is always “lost in translation,” and the possibility of perfect translations should not be assumed in cross-cultural and cross-national communications.
The trans/national, most of all, leads to the exploration of possibility of the transnational women’s movement. I have observed that the women’s movement against camptown prostitution is neither homogenous nor static. Rather, it can be characterized, drawing on Bystydzienski and Sekhon (1999), “as fluid and amorphous, diverse and fragmented, sporadic, issue-oriented, and autonomous with several streams of ideological thought and varying strategies” (11). At times co-opting the positions, policies, and procedures of the androcentric Korean national movement and the government, and at times maintaining an autonomous stance from them, the kijich’on movement has continuously negotiated the conflicts between/among Christian aspiration, national sentiment, and gender politics. It has transformed to respond to or negotiate with the differing needs of kijich’on women, regional communities, other NGOs, and the nation-states, and at the same time, retained some unchangeable tenets of beliefs, principles, and/or practices.
The kijich’on movement, which has gone through Korea’s dynamic political transition from dictatorship to democracy as well as from resistant nationalism to globalization, began to show the possibility of transnational feminist coalitions. Durebang in particular has been a central player in the East Asia-U.S.-Puerto Rico Women’s Network against U.S. Militarism, which was formed in 1997 when forty women activists, policy-makers, teachers, and students from South Korea, Okinawa, mainland Japan, the Philippines, and the United States gathered in Okinawa to strategize together about the negative effects of the U.S. military on each country (Adler 2000, 66-68; Brochure of the Network, 2004; Durebang 2001, 11-12; 214-216).263 Gwyn Kirk and Okazawa-Rey, American feminist scholars and activists, paved the way to building the alliance across national boundaries. Both have been involved in the issues of military prostitutes, addressing the effects of U.S. military presence in South Korea on the civilian population. They organized the international 263 The second international meeting was held in Washington D.C. in 1998. In 2000, Puerto Rican women who opposed U.S. navy bombing training on the island of Vieques also joined. The 4th international meeting was held in Korea in 2002, and the 5th meeting was in the Philippines on November 2004, which I attended. The mission statement of the Network is “to promote, model, and protect genuine security by creating an international women’s network of solidarity against militarism; and to strengthen our common consciousness and voice by sharing our experiences and making critical connections among militarism, imperialism, and systems of oppression and exploitation based on gender, race, class, and nation” in order to “envision a world of genuine security based on justice, respect for others across national boundaries, and economic planning based on local people’s needs, especially the needs of women and children” (Brochure of the Network, 2004; Adler 2000, 68-69). Its activism focuses on “[a]ctivities of participating organizations, including the provision of services and support, public education and protest, research, lobbying, litigation, promoting alternative economic development, and networking” (ibid.).
tour for kijich’on women in 1994 and founded the Network in May 1997 (Kirk 1995; Kirk and Okazawa-Rey 1999). Acting on their desire for feminist coalition, they prompted Korean activists in the kijich’on movement to consider the importance of the connections and continuities “between national and international,” as well as “domestic and foreign policy” (Kirk 1995, 14). The Network is not a membership organization, but collaboration among women activists from varied communities and nations in need of the continued diplomacy, negotiation, sincere engagement, and love, on which the possibility of transnational feminist politics is premised. For the ongoing negotiations with different culture, nation, race, class, perspective, and language, and a deep commitment to the community, in fact, activists strive to be transminded, in order to go beyond their presumptions or beliefs about others.
This dissertation thus contributes not only to an understanding of the ways of construction of camptown prostitution, but also to a provision of the possibility of its deconstruction through uncovering the contradictory processes of its re/construction. By understanding how and which complex power dynamics have been mediated in constructing the kijich’on, we may shift its positionality toward a better place, reconstitute it in a different way, and eventually deconstruct it. The theoretical conceptualization of trans/national, I believe, sheds light on a more complex theory of military prostitution and feminist radical theories of gender, race, and nation, as well as the transnational feminist critique. Kaplan and Grewal (1999) argue that transnational feminist critique needs the differential methodological imperative that brings together gender, political economy, the international division of labor, and a critical understanding of the role of academic institutional production (357).264 In this regard, my dissertation consequently contributes to the expansion of transnational feminist critique in that it analyzes the transnational patriarchal links of the military, power, culture, and capital as important reactionary interests against women and pursues the transnational women’s coalition to resist against them, as utilizing gender as a crucial analytical category.
264 Kaplan and Grewal (1999) argue that transnational feminist practices attend to the ways in which forms of representation intersect with movements of labor and capital (relations between culture and capital), asymmetries of power, and complex constructions of agency (ibid.).
For a staff member in a women’s organization of the kijich’on movement
Please tell me the history of your organization.
How did you get involved in the organization?
What are the internal relationships among people in the related movements and at different sites?
Which factors are more influential on the changes of organizational strategies and tactics?
How/when are linkages with other organizations generated and resolved?
What is (was) at stake within/outside the organization?
For a staff member in an organization of other social movements
Please tell me the history of your organization.
Please tell me the cause, leadership, activism, and subjects of your organization.
How did you get involved in the organization?
How is the relationship between your organization and women’s organizations of the kijich’on movement?
Why/ how/when is the coalition with the kijich’on movement engendered or resolved?
What is the future plan of your organization?
Joseph T. Caples, Lt. Col. MC Surgeon. 726.1. 1949 (2 February). “Report of Venereal Disease Rates During the Last Six Months of 1948 and January 1949.”
Levy, R.M. Colonel, AGD, Adjutant General. 726.1. 1949 (8 April). “Venereal Disease Responsibility” (General Headquarters Far East Command APO 500).
Minton, William L. 1948. Report of Essential Technical Medical Data. Prepared at USAFIK Rehabiliation Center, Office of the Surgeon, APO 6, Unit 4. P.pchech’.. 1952. Migunj.ngb.mny.ngjip (The Collection of Laws during USAMG Rule). Seoul: P.pchech’..
Public Health Problem of South Korea.1950 (January).
Surgeon USAFIK. 726.1.1948-49. “Venereal Disease Reports” (APO 235).
United State Army Forces in Korea (USAFIK). 1947-48 No. 27(December).No. 34 (July-August). “South Korean Interim Government Activities: Prepared by National Economic Board.”
USAFIK Minutes of the Meetings of VD control Council 1948 (August)-1949 (September).
USAFIK Rehabilitation Center Office of the Surgeon APO 6. 1948 (30 January). “Report of Essential Technical Medical Data.”
_________. 1948 (30 April). “Report of Essential Technical Medical Data.”
USAMGIK Minutes of the Meetings of VD control Council 1947-48 (July). Monthly released data from each Unit, e.g., HQ 6th Inf Div., HQ 7th Inf Div., HQ 2nd ECG, HQ USAFIK, HQ XXIV Corps, 80th Med Gp, Sp Trps XXIV Corps, 61st Ord Gp, and USAMGIK).
Ward, Orlando (Major General, U.S. Army Commanding). 1948 (12 April). Letter to Lieutenant General R. Hodge (Headquarters 6th Infantry Division APO 6).
Books and Articles in English
Abelmann, Nancy. 1996. Echoes of the Past, Epics of Dissent: A South Korean Social Movement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Acton, Lord. 1996. “Nationality.” In Mapping the Nation, ed. Gopal Balakrishnan, 17-38. London: Verso.
Ahmed, Sara. 2000. Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality. New York: Routledge.
Alexander, M. Jacqui and Chandra T. Mohanty. 1997. “Introduction: Genealogies, Legacies, Movements.” In Feminist Genealogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures, M. Jacqui Alexander and Chandra Talpade Mohanty eds., xiii- xlii. New York: Routledge.
Allen, Judith A. and Sally L. Kitch. 1998. “ Disciplined by Disciplines? The Need for an Interdisciplinary Research Mission in Women’s Studies.” Feminist Studies 24(2):275-300.
Altman, Dennis. 2001. Global Sex. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Amin, Samir. 2001. “Imperialism and Globalization.” Monthly Review. June (2001):6-28.
Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined Communities. London: Verso.
Appriah, Kwame Anthony. 1994. “Is the ‘Post-’ in ‘Postcolonial’ in the ‘Post-’ in ‘Postmodernism’? In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory, eds. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman, 420-44. New York: Columbia University Press.
Appadurai, Arjun. 1996. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
_________. 1994. “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy.” In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory, eds. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman, 324-39. New York: Columbia University Press.
Bae, Geum-Joo. 2004. “Reviewing United Nations World Conferences on Women for Korean Women’s Empowerment.” MA Thesis of Women’s Studies at the University of Maryland.
Balakrishnan, Gopal. 1996. “The National Imagination.” In Mapping the Nation, ed. Gopal Balakrishnan, 198-213. London: Verso.
Barry, Kathleen. 1995. The Prostitution of Sexuality. New York: New York University Press.
Barstow, Anne L., ed. 2000. War’s Dirty Secret: Rape, Prostitution, and Other Crimes against Women. Cleveland, Ohio: The Pilgrim Press.
Bauer, Otto. 1996. “The Nation.” In Mapping the Nation, ed. Gopal Balakrishnan, 39-
77. London: Verso.
Berberoglu, Berch, ed. 2002. Labor and Capital in the Age of Globalization: Labor Process and the Changing Nature of Work in the Global Economy. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Bertone, Andrea M. 2000. “Sexual Trafficking in Women: International Political Economy and the Politics of Sex.” Gender Issues 18(1):4-23.
Beynon, John and David Dunkerley. 2000. Globalization: The Reader. New York: Routledge.
Bhabha, Homi K. 1994a. The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge.
_____________. 1994b. “Remembering Fanon: Self, Psyche and the Colonial Condition.” In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory, eds. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman, 112-23. New York: Columbia University Press.
Bhavnani, Kum-Kum. 2000. “Organic Hybridity or Commodification of Hybridity? Comments on Mississippi Masala.” Meridians 1(1):187-203.
Bindman, Jo. 1998. “An International Perspective on Slavery in the Sex Industry.” In Global Sex Workers: Right, Resistance, and Redefinition, eds. Kamala Kempadoo and Jo Doezema, 65-68. New York: Routledge.
Block, Rita N. and Thistlethwaite, Susan B. 1996. Casting Stones: Prostitution and Liberation in Asia and the United States. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers.
Blom, Ida. 2000. “Gender and Nation in International Comparison.” In Gendered Nations eds. Ida Blom, Karen Hagemann, and Catherine Hall, 3-26. New York: Berg.
Bowker, Geofferey C. and Star, Susan L. 2000. Sorting Things Out. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Brace, L. and O’Connell Davidson, Julia. 2000. “Minding the Gap: General and Substantive Theorizing on Power and Exploitation.” Signs 25(4):1045-50.
Brandt, Allan M. 1985. No Magic Bullet: A Social History of Venereal Disease in the United States Since 1880. New York: Oxford University Press.
Breuilly, John. 2001. “The State and Nationalism.” In Understanding Nationalism, eds. Montserrat Guibernau and John Hutchinson, 32-52. London: Polity.
_________. 1996. “Approaches to Nationalism.” In Mapping the Nation, ed. Gopal Balakrishnan, 146-74. London: Verso.
Bystydzienski, Jill M. and Joti Sekhon, ed. 1999. Democratization and Women’s Grassroots Movements. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Chai, Alice Yun. 1997. “Integrative Feminist Politics in the Republic of Korea.” In Feminist Nationalism, ed. Lois A. West, 169-86. New York: Routledge.
Castro, Myrna C. 2003. Transnational Women Trafficking in South Korea and its Relation with the U.S. Military Bases. Master Thesis at Seoul National University.
Chatterjee, Partha. 1996. “Whose Imagined Community?” In Mapping the Nation, ed. Gopal Balakrishnan, 214-25. London: Verso.
_________. 1993. The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Princeton: Princeton UP.
Choi, Chungmoo. 1998. “Nationalism and Construction of Gender in Korea.” In Dangerous Women: Gender and Korean Nationalism, eds. Elaine H. Kim and Chungmoo Choi, 9-32. New York: Routledge.
_________. 1997. “The Discourse of Decolonization and Popular Memory: South Korea.” In The Politics of Culture in the Shadow of Capital, eds. Lisa Lowe and David Lloyd, 461-84. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Choi, Jang Jip. 2000. “Democratization, Civil Society, and the Civil Social Movement in Korea: The Significance of the Citizens’ Alliance for the 2000 General Elections.” Korea Journal 40(3):26-57.
Choi, Kyeong-Hee. 1999. “Neither Colonial nor National: The Making of the ‘New Women’ in Pak Wans.’s ‘Mother’s Stake 1.” In Colonial Modernity in Korea, eds. Gi-Wook Choi and Michael Robinson, 191-220. In Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Chow, Ester Ngan-ling. 2002. “Globalization, East Asian Development, and Gender.” In Transforming Gender and Development in East Asia, ed. Ester Ngan-ling Chow, 9-24. New York: Routledge.
Chung, Chin Sung. 1997. “The Origin and Development of the Military Sexual Slavery Problem in Imperial Japan.” Positions 5(1):219-55.
Collins, Patricia Hill. (1991) 2000. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. New York: Routledge.
_________. 1998. “Some Group Matters: Intersectionality, Situated Standpoints, and Black Feminist Thought.” In Fighting Words: Black Women and the Search for Justice, ed Patricia H. Collins, 201-28. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
_________. 1986. “Learning from the Outsider Within: The Social Significance of Black Feminist Thought.” Social Problems 33(6):14-32.
Courtwright, David T. 1997. “Morality, Religion, and Drug Use.” In Morality and Health, eds. Brandt, Allan M. and Paul Rozin, New York: Routledge.
Cumings, Bruce. 1997. Korea’s Place in the Sun: A Modern History. New York: Norton.
_________. 1992. “Silent but Deadly: Sexual Subordination in the U.S.-Korean Relationship.” In Let the Good Times Roll: Prostitution and the U.S. Military in Asia, eds. Saundra P. Sturdevant and Brenda Stoltzfus, 169-75. New York: The New Press.
_____________. 1990. The Roaring of the Cataract, 1947-1950. Vol. 2 of The Origins of the Korean War. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Dank, Barry M. and Robert Refinetti, eds. 1999. Sex Work & Sex Workers: Sexuality & Culture vo.2. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Denzin, Norman K. and Yvonna Lincoln, eds. 1998. The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues. London: Sage.
Desai, Manisha. 2002. “Transnational Solidarity: Women’s Agency, Structural Adjustment, and Globalization.” In Women’s Activism and Globalization: Linking Local Struggles and Transnational Politics, eds. Nancy A. Naples and Manisha Desai, 15-33. New York: Routledge.
Dill, Bonnie Thornton and Maxine Baca Zinn. 1996. “Theorizing Difference From Multiracial Feminism.” Feminist Studies 22(2):321-31.
Dirlik, Arif. “The Postcolonial Aura: Third World Criticism in the Age of Global Capitalism.” In Dangerous Liaisons, eds. Ann, McClintock, Aamir, Mufti, and Ella Shohat, 501-28. Minneapolis, MI: University of Minnesota Press.
Dissanayake, Wilmal, ed. 1994. Colonialism and Nationalism in Asian Cinema. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Doezema, Jo. 2002. “Who Gets to Choose?: Coercion, Consent, and the UN Trafficking Protocol.” In Gender, Trafficking, and Slavery, ed. Rachel Masika, 20-27. Oxford: Oxfam.
_________. 2000. “Loose Women or Lost Women? The Re-emergence of the Myth of White Slavery in Contemporary Discourses of Trafficking in Women.” Gender Issues 18(1):23-51.
_________. 1998. “Forced to Choose: Beyond the Voluntary v. Forced Prostitution Dichotomy.” In Global Sex Workers: Right, Resistance, and Redefinition, eds. Kamala Kempadoo and Jo Doezema, 34-50. New York: Routledge.
Eley, Geoff and Ronald Grigor Suny. 1996. “Introduction: From the Moment of Social History to the Work of Cultural Representation.” In Becoming National, eds. Geoff Eley and Ronald Grigor Suny, 3-37. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Enloe. Cynthia. 2000. Maneuvers: International Politics of Militarizing Women’s Lives. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
_________. 1990. Bananas, Beaches, and Bases: Making Feminist Sense of International Politics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Eschle, Catherine. 2001. Global Democracy, Social Movements, and Feminism. Oxford: Westview Press.
Farr, Katharyn. 2005. Sex Trafficking: The Global Market in Women and Children. New York: Worth Publishers.
Fanon, Frantz. 1967. Black Skin, White Masks. New York: Grove Press.
Featherstone, Mike. 1996. “Localism, Globalism, and Cultural Identity.” In Global/Local, eds. Rob Wilson and Wimal Dissanayake, 46-77. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Fine, Michelle. 1998. “Working the Hyphens: Reinventing Self and Other in Qualitative Research.” In The Landscape of Qualitative Research, eds. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln, ch. 4, 130-55. London: Sage.
Finger, Anke and Victoria Rosner. 2001. “Forum: Doing Feminism in Interdisciplinary Contexts.” Feminist Studies 27(2):499-503.
Foucault, Michel. 1990. The History of Sexuality. New York: Vintage Books.
Friedman, Susan S. 1998a. Mappings. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
_________. 1998b. “(Inter)Disciplinarity and the Question of the Women’s Studies Ph.D.” Feminist Studies 24(2):301-25.
Frye, Marilyn. 1996. “The Necessity of Differences: Constructing a Positive Category of Women.” Sings: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 21(4):991-1010.
Funk, Nanette. 1993. “Feminism East and West.” In Gender Politics and Post-Communism, eds. Nannette Funk and Magda Mueller, 318-30. New York: Routledge.
Fujime Yuki. 1997. “The Licensed Prostitution System and the Prostitution Abolition Movement in Modern Japan.” Positions 5(1):135-70.
Gandhi, Leela. 1998. Postcolonial Theory: A Critical Introduction. New York: Columbia University Press.
Gill, Stephen. 1996. “Globalization, Democratization, and the Politics of Indifference.” In Globalization: Critical Reflections, eds. James H. Mittelman, chap.10:205-28. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Garamone, Jim 2006. “U.S. Set to Leave 25,000 Troops in Korea.” Available online at http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2006/08/mil-060808-afps05.htm
Global Security 2006a. “Camp Market.” Available online at
_________. 2006b. “Camp Hialeah.” Available online at
_________. 2006c. “Crime Prevention.” Available online at
Grewal, Inderpal. 1998. “On the New Global Feminism and the Family of Nations: Dilemmas of Transnational Feminist Practice.” In Talking Visions: Multicultural Feminism in a Transnational Age, ed. Ella Shohat, 501-31. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Grewal, Inderpal and Caren Kaplan, eds. 1994. Scattered Hegemonies: Postmodernity and Transnational Feminist Practices. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Guibernau, Montserrat and John Hutchinson, eds. 2001. Understanding Nationalism. Cambridge: Polity.
Gunning, Isabelle. 1992. “Arrogant Perception, World-Traveling and Multicultural Feminism: The Case of Female Genital Surgeries.” Columbia Human Rights Law Review 23(2):189-248.
Hall, Stuart. 1996. “Ethnicity: Identity and Difference.” In Becoming National, eds. Geoff Eley and Ronald Grigor Suny, 339-49. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
_________. 1995. “The Whites of Their Eyes: Racist Ideologies and the Media.” In Gender, Race, and Class in Media, eds. Gail Dines and Jean M. Humez, 18-
22. London: Sage.
_________. 1994. “Cultural Identity and Diaspora.” In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory, eds. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman, 392-403. New York: Columbia University Press.
Haraway, Donna. 1988. “Situated Knowledge: The Science Question in Feminism and Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies 14(3):575-99.
Harding, Sandra. 1987. “Introduction: Is There a Feminist Method?” In Feminism and Methodology, ed. Sandra Harding, 1-14. Bloomington, ID: Indiana University Press.
Harvey, David. 2000. “Time- Space Compression and the Postmodern Condition.” In The Global Transformations Reader, eds. David Held and Anthony McGrew, 82-91. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Held, David and Anthony McGrew. 2000. “The Great Globalization Debate: An Introduction.” In The Global Transformations Reader, eds. David Held and Anthony McGrew, 1-48. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Hennessy, Rosemary. 2000. Profit and Pleasure. New York: Routledge.
Hesse, Barnor, ed. 2000. Un/Settled Multiculturalism: Diaspora, Entanglement, Transruptions. London: Zed Books.
Hesse-Biber, Sharlene, Christina Gilmartin, and Robin Lyndenberg, eds. 1999.
Feminist Approaches to Theory and Methodology: An Interdisciplinary Reader. New York: Oxford university Press.
Heung, Marina. 1995. “Representing Ourselves: Films and Videos by Asian American/Canadian Women.” In Feminism, Multiculturalism, and the Media, ed. Angharad N. Valdiva, 82-104. New York: Sage Publication.
hooks, bell. 2000. Feminism is for Everybody. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
Hoogvelt, Ankie. 2001. Globalization and the Postcolonial World. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hye, Alexandra. 1999. “From a ‘Short Time’ to ‘A Way Out’: Race, Militarism & Korean Sex Workers in New York.” Colorlines. Oakland: Summer 2(2).
IOM. 2005. “Labor Migration in Asia.” Available online at
_________. 2002. “A Review of Data on Traffciking in the Republic of Korea.” Available online at
_________. 2000. “Combating Trafficking in South-East Asia: A Review of Policy and Program Responses.” Available online at http://www.iom.int//DOCUMENTS/PUBLICATION/EN/mrs_2_2000.pdf
Jager, Sheila Miyoshi. 2003. Narratives of Nation Building in Korea: A Genealogy of Patriotism. Armonk, NW: An East Gate Book.
_________. 1996. “Women, Resistance and the Divided Nation: The Romantic Rhetoric of Korean Reunification.” The Journal of Asian Studies 55(1):3-21.
Jaggar, Alison M. 2000. “Globalizing Feminist Ethics.” In Decentering the Center: Philosophy for a Multicultural, Postcolonial, and Feminist World, eds. Uma Narayan and Sandra Harding. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
_________. 2001. “Is Globalization for Women?” Comparative Literature 53(4): 298-314.
Jameson, Frederic. 1988. “Cognitive Mapping.” In Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, eds. Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg, 347-57. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
______. 1991. Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Capitalism. London: Verso.
Jayawardena, Kumari. 1986. Feminism and Nationalism in the Third World. London: Zed Press.
Jeon Sang Sook. 2002. “U.S. Korean Policy and the Moderates during the U.S. Military Government Era.” In Korea Under the American Military Government, 1945-1948, ed. Bonnie B.C. Oh, 79-101. Westport, CT: Praeger Publisher.
Jeffrey, Leslie A. 2002. Sex and Borders: Gender, National Identity, and Prostitution Policy in Thailand. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
Jeffreys, Sheila. 1997. The Idea of Prostitution. Melbourne: Spinifex Press.
Johnson, Chalmers. 2004a. The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.
_________. 2004b. Blowback: the Costs and Consequences of American Empire. New York: Owl Book.
Juan, E. San. 1998. Beyond Postcolonial Theory. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Kandiyoti, Deniz. 1994. “Identity and its Discontents: Women and the Nation.” In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory, eds. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman, 376-91. New York: Columbia University Press.
Kang, Hyun Yi. 1998. “Re-membering Home.” In Dangerous Women: Gender and Korean Nationalism, eds. Elaine H. Kim and Chungmoo Choi, 249-90. New York: Routledge.
Kaplan, Caren. 2000. Questions of Travel: Postmodern Discourse of Displacement. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
_________. 1998. “‘Beyond the Pale’: Rearticulating U.S. Jewish Whiteness.” In Talking Visions: Multicultural Feminism in a Transnational Age, ed. Ella Shohat, 451-84. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
_________. 1994. “The Politics of Location as Transnational Feminist Critical Practice.” In Scattered Hegemonies: Postmodernity and Transnational Feminist Practices, eds. Inderpal Grewal and Caren Kaplan, 137-52. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Kaplan, Caren and Inderpal Grewal. 2002. “Transnational Practices and Interdisciplinary Feminist Scholarship: Refiguring Women’s and Gender Studies.” In Women’s Studies on Its Own, ed. Robyn Wiegman, 66-81. Dunham, NC: Duke University Press.
_________. 1999. “Transnational Feminist Cultural Studies: Beyond the Marxism/Poststructuralism/Feminism Divides.” In Between Women and Nation: Nationalisms, Transnational Feminisms, and the State, eds. Caren Kaplan, Norma Alarcon, and Minoo Moallem, 349-63. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Kapoor, Ilan. 2002. “Capitalism, Culture, Agency: Dependency versus Postcolonial Theory.” Third World Quarterly 23(4):647-64.
Kapur, Rantna. 2003. “The ‘Other’ Side of Globalization: The Legal Regulation of Cross-Border Movements.” Canadian Women’s Studies: Migration, Labor and Exploitation Trafficking in Women and Girls 22(3-4):6-15. Toronto: York University Publication.
Kempadoo, Kamala. 1998a. “Introduction: Globalizing Sex Workers’ Rights.” In Global Sex Workers: Right, Resistance, and Redefinition, 1-28. New York: Routledge.
_________. 1998b. “The Migrant Tightrope: Experiences from the Caribbean.” In Global Sex Workers: Right, Resistance, and Redefinition, eds. Kamala Kempadoo and Jo Doezema, 124-38. New York: Routledge.
Kennedy, Paul and Victor Roudometof, eds. 2002. Communities across Borders: New Immigrants and Transnational Cultures. New York: Routledge.
Kim, Andrew Eungi and Gil-sung Park. 2003. “Nationalism, Confucianism, Work Ethic and Industrialization in South Korea.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 33(1):37-49.
Kim, Elaine H. 1998. “Men’s Talk: A Korean American View of South Korean Constructions of Women, Gender, and Masculinity.” In Dangerous Women: Gender and Korean Nationalism, eds. Elaine H. Kim and Chungmoo Choi, 67-118. New York: Routledge.
_________. 1987. “Sex Tourism in Asia: A Reflection of Political and Economic Inequality.” In Korean Women in Transition: At Home and Abroad, eds. Yu Eui-Young & Earl H. Phillips, 127-44. Center for Korean-American and Korea Studies, UCLA.
Kim, Hyuk-Rae. 2000. “The State and Civil Society in Transition: the Role of Non-governmental Organizations in South Korea.” The Pacific Review 13(4):595-
Kim, Hyun Sook. 1998. “Yanggongju as Allegory of the Nation: Images of Working-Class Women in Popular and Radical Texts.” In Dangerous Women, eds. Elaine H. Kim and Chungmoo Choi, 175-202. New York and London: Routledge.
Kim, Jinwung. 1994. “The Nature of South Korean Anti-Americanism.” Korea Journal 34(1):36-47.
Kim, Ki-Hoon. 1982. “The Development of Contemporary U.S.-ROK Economic Relations.” In U.S.- Korean Relations 1882-1982, ed., Tae-Hwan Kwak, 323-
40. Seoul: Kyungnam University Press.
Kim, Kyung-ai. 1996. “Nationalism: An Advocate of, or a Barrier to, Feminism in South Korea.” Women’s Studies International Forum, 19(1-2):65-74.
Kim, Samuel S. 2000. “Korea and Globalization (Segyehwa): A Framework for Analysis.” In Korea’s Globalization, ed. Samuel Kim, 1-28. New York: Cambridge University Press.
_________. 2003. “Korea’s Democratization in the Global-Local Nexus.” In Korea’s Democratization, ed. Samuel S. Kim, 3-44. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kim, Seung-kyung. 2003. “Gender Policy and New Status of Women in South Korea.” In Korea in Transition: Three Years under the Kim Dae Jung Government, ed. Chung-in Moon and David I. Steinberg. Seoul: Yonsei University.
_________. 1997a. Class Struggle or Family Struggle? The Lives of Women Factory Workers in South Korea. New York: Cambridge University Press.
_________. 1997b. “Productivity, Militancy, and Femininity: Gendered Images of South Korean Women Factory Workers.” AJWS 3(3):8-44.
Kim, Seung-kyung and Carole McCann. 2003. “Introduction.” In Feminist Theory: Local and Global Perspectives. New York: Routledge.
Kim, Sunhyuk. 2000. The Politics of Democratization in Korea: The Role of Civil Society. Pittsburg, PA: University of Pittsburg Press.
_________. 1998. “Civil Society and Democratization in South Korea.” Korea Journal 38(2):214-34.
Kim, Yeong-hui. 2000. “Theories for a Progressive Women’s Movement in Korea.” Korea Journal, 40(3):217-36.
King, Anthony D. 2000. Culture, Globalization and the World System. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
King, Katie. 2002. “Theorizing Structures of Women’s Studies: Interdisciplinarities, Languages of Power & Access, Generations and Careers.” Unpublished Manuscript.
_________. 2001. “Productive Agencies of Feminist Theory: The Work It Does.” Feminist Theory 2(1):94-98.
_________. 1994. Theory in Its Feminist Travels: Conversations in U.S. Women’s Movements. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Kirk, Gwyn. 1995. “Speaking Out about Militarized Prostitution in South Korea.” Peace and Freedom 55(4):12-14.
Kirk, Gwyn and Okazawa-Rey Margo. 2000. “Demilitarizing Security: Women Oppose U.S. Militarism in East Asia.” In Frontline Feminisms: Women, War, and Resistance, eds. Maguerite R. Waller and Jenniffer Rycenga, 159-71. Garland Publishing, Inc.
Klein, Julie Thompson. 1990. Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory & Practice. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
Kleinknecht, Alfred and Wengel, Janter. 1998. “The Myth of Economic Globalization.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 22:637-47.
Koikari, Mire. 1999. “Rethinking Gender and Power in the U.S. Occupation of Japan, 1945-1952.” Gender and History 11(2).
Kray, Susan. 1995. “Orientalization of an ‘Almost White’ Woman: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Interlocking Effects of Race, Class, Gender, and Ethnicity in American Mass Media.” In Feminism, Multiculturalism, and the Media: Global Diversities, ed. Angharad N. Valdiva, 221-44. London: Sage.
Kwak, Tae-Hwan. 1982. “U.S.-Korea Security Relations.” In U.S.- Korean Relations 1882-1982, ed., Tae-Hwan Kwak, 223-43. Seoul: Kyungnam University Press.
Kwon, Insook. 2001. “A Feminist Exploration of Military Conscript.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 3(1):26-54.
_________. 1998. “‘The New Women’s Movement’ in 1920s Korea: Rethinking the Relationship Between Imperialism and Women.” Gender and History 10(3): 381-405.
Laqueur, Thomas. 1990. Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lal, Jayati. 1999. “Situating Locations: The Politics of Self, Identity and “Other” in Living and Writing the Text.” In Feminist Approaches to Theory and Methodology, eds. Sharlene Hesse-Biber et al., 100-37. New York: Oxford University Press.
Latour, Bruno. 2003. War of the Worlds: What About Peace? Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press.
Lee, Hye-Kyung. 2003. “Gender, Migration, and Civil Activism in South Korea.” Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 12(November 1-2):127-53.
Lee, Su-Hoon. 1993. “Transitional Politics of Korea, 1987-1992: Activation of Civil Society.” Pacific Affairs 66(3):351-67.
Lerum, Kari. 1999. “Twelve- step Feminism Makes Sex Workers Sick: How the State and the Recovery Movement Turn Radical Women into ‘Useless Citizens.’” In Sex Work & Sex Workers: Sexuality & Culture Volume 2, eds. Dank Refinetti, 7-36. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Lieven, Anatol. 2004. America Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lind, Amy. 2000. “Negotiating Boundaries: Women’s Organizations and the Politics of Restructuring in Ecuador.” In Gender and Global Restructuring: Sightings, Sites and Resistance, eds. Marianne H. Marchand and Anne Sisson Runyan, 161-75. New York: Routledge.
Lindlof, Thomas R. 1995. Qualitative Communication Research Methods. London: Sage.
Ling, L. H. M. 1999. “Sex Machine: Global Hypermasculinity and Images of the Asian Woman in Modernity.” Positions 7(2):277-306.
Lone, Stewart & Gavan McCormack. 1993. Korea: Since 1850. New York: Longman Cheshire.
Loomba, Ania. 1998. Colonialism/ Postcolonialism: The New Critical Idiom. New York: Routledge.
_________.1994b. “Overworlding the ‘Third World’.” In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory, eds. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman, 305-23. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lowe, Lisa. 1997. “Work, Immigration, Gender: New Subjects of Cultural Politics.” In The Politics of Culture in the Shadow of Capital, eds. Lisa Lowe and David Lloyd, 354-74. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Lowe, Lisa and David Lloyd. 1997. “Introduction.” In The Politics of Culture in the Shadow of Capital, eds. Lisa Lowe and David Lloyd. 1-32, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Mani, Lata. 1990. “Multiple Mediations: Feminist Scholarship in the Age of Multinational Reception.” Feminist Review 35:24-41.
Mann, Michael. 1996. “Nation-states in Europe and Other Continents: Diversifying, Developing, Not Dying” In Mapping the Nation, ed. Gopal Balakrishnan, 295-
316. London: Verso.
Marchand, Marianne H. and Anne Sisson Runyan. 2000. Gender and Global Restructuring: Sightings, Sites and Resistance. New York: Routledge
May, Vivian M. 2002. “Disciplinary Desires and Undisciplined Daughters: Negotiating the Politics of a Women’s Studies Doctoral Education.” NWSA 14(1):134-59.
Mayer, Tamar ed. 2000. Gendering Ironies of Nationalism. New York: Routledge.
McClintock, Anne. 1996. “No Longer in a Future Heaven: Nationalism, Gender, and Race.” In Becoming National, eds. Geoff Eley and Ronald Grigor Suny, 260-
85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
_________. 1995. Imperial Leather: Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest. New York: Routledge.
McGrew, Anthony G. 1998. “The Globalization Debate: Putting the Advanced Capitalist State in its Place.” Global Society: Journal of Interdisciplinary International Relations 12(3):299- 321.
McNinch, Joseph H., Colonel. 1954. “Venereal Disease Problems, U.S. Army Forces, Far East 1950-53.” Presented 27 April 1954, to the Course on Recent Advances in Medicine and Surgery, Army Medical Service Graduate School, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, D.C. Available online at
Meade, E. Grant. 1951. American Military Government in Korea. New York: Columbia University Press.
Messer-Davidow, Ellen. 2002. Disciplining Feminism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Mies, Maria. 1998. “World Economy, Patriarchy, and Accumulation.” In Women in the Third World: Encyclopedia of Contemporary Issues, ed. Nelly P. Stromquist, 37-45. New York: Garland.
Mishra, Vijay and Bob Hodge. 1994. “What is Post (-)colonialism?” In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory, eds. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman, 276-90. New York: Columbia University Press.
Miyoshi, Masao. 1996. “A Borderless World? From Colonialism to Transnationalism and the Decline of the Nation-State.” In Global/Local, eds. Rob Wilson and Wimal Dissanayake, 78-106. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Moallen, Minoo. 1999. “Transnationalism, Feminism, and Fundamentalism.” In Between Women and Nation: Nationalisms, Transnational Feminisms, and the State, eds. Caren Kaplan, Norma Alarcon, and Minoo Moallem, 320-48. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Moghadam, Valentine. M. 2005. Globalizing Women: Transnational Feminist Networks. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
_________. 1999. “Gender and Globalization: Female Labor and Women’s Mobilization.” Journal of World-Systems Research (2):367-88.
_________. 1994. Gender and National Identity. London: Zed Books.
Mohanty, Chandra. 2003. Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
_________. 1999. “Women Workers and Capitalist Scripts: Ideologies of Domination, Common Interests and the Politics of Solidarity.” In Feminist Approaches to Theory and Methodology: An Interdisciplinary Reader, eds. Sharlene Hesse-Biber, Christina Gilmartin, and Robin Lydenberg. New York: Oxford University Press.
_________. 1998. “Crafting Genealogies: On the Geography and Politics of Home, Nation, and Community.” In Talking Visions: Multicultural Feminism in a Transnational Age, ed. Ella Shohat, 485-500. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
_________. 1991a. “Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses.” In Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism, eds. Chandra Mohanty, Anna Russo, and Lourdes Torres, 51-80. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press.
_________. 1991b. “Cartographies of Struggle: Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism.” In Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism, eds. Chandra Mohanty, Anna Russo, and Lourdes Torres, 1-47. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press.
Moon, Katharine H.S. 2000. “Strangers in the Midst of Globalization: Migrant Workers and Korean Nationalism.” In Korea’s Globalization, ed. Samuel Kim, 147-69. New York: Cambridge University Press.
_________. 1999. “South Korean Movements against Militarized Sexual Labor.” Asian Survey 39(2):310-27.
_________. 1998. “Prostitute Bodies and Gendered States.” In Dangerous Women, eds. Elaine H. Kim and Chungmoo Choi, 141-74. New York and London: Routledge.
_________. 1997. Sex Among Allies: Military Prostitution in U.S.- Korea Relations. New York: Columbia University Press.
Moon, Seungsook. 2002. “The Production and Subversion of Hegemonic Masculinity: Reconfiguring Gender Hierarchy in Contemporary South Korea.” In Under Construction, ed. Laurel Kendall, 79-114. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.
_________. 1998. “Gender, Militarization, and Universal Male Conscription in South Korea.” In The Women and War Reader, eds. Lois Ann Lorentzen and Jennifer Turpin, 90-100. New York: New York University.
Moses, Claire. 1998. “What’s In A Name? On Writing the History of Feminism.” International Academic Conference on Women’s Studies and Development in the Twenty-First Century, Peking University (June).
Moya, Paula M.L. 1997. “Postmodernism, ‘Realism,’ and the Politics of Identity: Cherrie Moraga and Chicana Feminism.” In Feminist Genealogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures, eds. M. Jacqui Alexander & Chandra T. Mohanty, 125-50. New York: Routledge.
Mushakoji, Kinhide. 2001. “Engendering the Japanese ‘Double Standard’ Patriarchal Democracy: The Case of the ‘Comfort Women’ and Military Sexual Slavery.” In Gender, Globalization, and Democratization, eds. Rita Mae Kelly et al, 205-22. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Narayan, Uma. 1999. “Essence of Culture and a Sense of History: A feminist Critique of Cultural Essentialism.” In Decentering the Center, eds, Uma Narayan and Sandra Harding, 80-100. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
_________. 1998. Dislocating Cultures. New York: Routledge.
O’Connell Davison, Julia. 1998. Prostitution, Power, and Freedom. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Oh, Bonnie B.C. 2002. “Introduction.” In Korea Under the American Military Government, 1945-1948, ed. Bonnie B.C. Oh. Westport, CT: Praeger Publisher.
Pettman, Jan Jindy. 1999. “Globalization and the Gendered Politics of Citizenship.” In Women, Citizenship and Difference, eds. Nira Yuval-Davis and Pnina Werbner, 207-20. New York: Zed Books.
Pickup, Francine. 1998. “More Words but No Action?: Forced Migration and Trafficking of Women.” Gender and Development 6(1):44-51.
Potter, W. James. 1996. An Analysis of Thinking and Research about Qualitative Methods. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Price, Janet and Shildrick, Margrit. 1999. “Mapping the Colonial Body: Sexual Economies and the State in Colonial India.” In Feminist Theory and the Body, eds. Janet Price and Margrit Shildrick, 388-98. New York: Routledge.
Pryse, Marjorie. 2000. “Trans/Feminist Methodology: Bridges to Interdisciplinary Thinking.” NWSA 12(2):105-18.
Reinharz, Shulamit. 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press.
Renan, Ernest. 1996. “What is a Nation.” In Becoming National, eds. Geoff Eley and Ronald Grigor Suny, 42-55. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, Michael E. 1986. “Nationalism and the Korean Tradition, 1896-1920: Iconoclasm, Reform, and National Identity.” Korean Studies 10:35-53.
Rubin, Herbert J. and Irene S. Rubin. 1995. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. London: Sage.
Ruenkaew, Pataya. 2002. “The Transnational Prostitution of Thai Women to German: A Variety of Transnational Labour Migration?” In Transnational Prostitution: Changing Global Patterns, eds. Susanne Thorbek and Bandana Pattanaik, 69-
85. London: Zed Books.
Ruzek, S. Olesen, V. and Clarke, A. 1997. “What are the Dynamics of Differences?” In Women’s Health: Complexities and Differences, eds. Ruzek, S. Olesen, V. and Clarke, A., 51-95. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
Ryan, Chris and Hall, C Michael. 2001. Sex Tourism: Marginal People and Liminalities. New York: Routledge.
Saadawi et al. 2000. Ama Ata Aidoo, Edna Acosta-Belen, Amrita Basu, Maryse Conde, Nell Painter, and Nawal Saadawi speak on feminism, race and transnationalism. Meridians 1(1):1-28.
Said, Edward. W. 1997. “Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims.” In Dangerous Liaisons, eds. Ann, McClintock, Aamir, Mufti, and Ella Shohat, 15-38. Minneapolis, MI: University of Minnesota Press.
_________. 1979. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.
Salaff, Janet W. 2002. “Women’s Work in International Migration.” In Transforming Gender and Development in East Asia, ed. Ester Ngan-ling Chow. New York: Routledge.
Sandoval, Chela. 2000. Methodology of the Oppressed. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Santos, Aida F. 2002a. “Globalization and International Sex Trafficking in Women.” Paper Presented at the International Conference of East Asia-US Women’s Network for Anti-Militarism.
_________. 2002b. “Patterns, Profiles and Health Consequences of Sexual Exploitation: The Philippine Report.” A Project of the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women-Asia Pacific with the Ford Foundation.
Sassen, Saskia. 2002. “Global Cities and Survival Circuits,” Global Women: Nannies, Maids, and Sex Workers in the New Economy, eds. Barbara Ehrenreich and Arlie Russell Hochschild, 254-74. New York: Owl Books.
_________. 1998. Globalization and Its Discontents: Essays on the New Mobility of People and Money. New York: The New Press.
Saunders, Penelope and Soderlund, Gretchen. 2003. “Threat or Opportunity?: Sexuality, Gender and the Ebb and Flow of Trafficking as Discourse.” Canadian Women’s Studies: Migration, Labor and Exploitation Trafficking in Women and Girls 22 (3-4):16-24. Toronto: York University Publication.
Schellstede, Sangmie Choi, ed. 2000. Comfort Women Speak: Testimony by Sex Slaves of the Japanese Military. New York: Holmes & Meier Publishers, Inc.
Schutte, Ofeila. 1999. “Cultural Alternity: Cross-Cultural Communication and Feminist Theory in North-South Contexts.” In Decentering the Center, eds., Uma Narayan and Sandra Harding , 47-66. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Scott, Joan W. (1988) 1999a. Gender and the Politics of History. New York: Colombia University Press.
____________. 1999b. “The Evidence of Experience.” In Feminist Approaches to Theory and Methodology, eds. Sharlene Hesse-Biber et al., 79-99. New York: Oxford University Press.
Shapiro, Michael J. 1999. “The Ethics of Encounter: Unreading, Unmapping the Imperium.” In Moral Spaces: Rethinking Ethics and World Politics, eds. David Campbell and Michael J. Shapiro, 57-91. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Shin, Eui-Hang. 1987. Interracially Married Korean Women in the United States: An Analysis Based on Hypergamy.Exchange Theory.” In Korean Women in Transition: At Home and Abroad, eds. Yu Eui-Young and Earl H. Phillips, 249-74. Center for Korean-American and Korea Studies, UCLA.
Shin, Hei Soo. 1991. “Women’s Sexual Services and Economic Development: The Political Economy of the Entertainment Industry and South Korean Dependent Development.” Dissertation of PhD in Sociology Program, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey.
Shin, Gi-Wook. 1996. “South Korean Anti-Americanism: A Comparative Perspective.” Asian Survey 36 (8):787-803.
Shohat, Ella. 1998. “Introduction.” In Talking Visions: Multicultural Feminism in a Transnational Age, ed. Ella Shohat, 1-62. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
_________. 1997. “Post- Third- Worldist Culture: Gender, Nation, and the Cinema.” In Feminist Genealogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures, eds. M. Jacqui Alexander and Chandra T. Mohanty, 183-209. New York: Routledge.
Shohat, Ella and Robert Stam. 1996. “From the Imperial Family to the Transnational Imaginary: Media Spectatorship in the Age of Globalization.” In Global/Local, eds. Rob Wilson and Wimal Dissanayake, 143-70. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Sinha, Mrinalini. 2000. “Refashioning Mother India: Feminism and Nationalism in Late-Colonial India.” Feminist Studies 26(3):623-44.
Simons, Lisa. 1999. “Mail Order Brides: The Legal Framework and Possibilities for Change.” In Gender and Immigration, eds. Gregory A. Kelson and Debra L. De Laet, 127-43. New York: NYU Press.
Sklair, Leslie. 2002. Globalization: Capitalism & Its Alternatives. New York: Oxford University Press.
Stimpson, Catharine. 2000. “On Being Transminded.” Sign 25(4):1007-12.
Stoler, Ann Laura. 1997. “Making Empire Respectable: The Politics of Race and Sexual Morality in Twentieth- Century Colonial Cultures.” In Dangerous Liaisons: Gender, Nation, and Postcolonial Perspectives. eds. Ann McClintock, Aamir Mufti, and Ella Shohat, 344-73. Minneapolis, MI: University of Minnesota Press.
Sturdevant, Saundra. 2000. “Who Benefits? U.S. Military, Prostitution, and Base Conversation.” In Frontline Feminisms: Women, War, and Resistance, eds. Maguerite R. Waller and Jenniffer Rycenga, 141-58. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.
Sturdevant, Saundra and Brenda Stoltzfus. 1992. “Tong Du Chun: The Bar System.” In Let the Good Times Roll: Prostitution and the U.S. Military in Asia, eds. Saundra P. Sturdevant and Brenda Stoltzfus, 176-79. New York: The New Press.
Tambe, Ashwini. 2000. “Codes of Misconduct: The Regulation of Prostitution in Colonial Bombay, 1860-1947. Ph.D. Dissertation of University of Maryland.
Tanaka, Yuki. 2002. Japan’s Comfort Women: Sexual Slavery and Prostitution during World War II and the US Occupation. New York: Routledge.
Thorbek, Susanne and Bandana Pattanaik, eds. 2002. Transnational Prostitution: Changing Global Patterns. London: Zed Books.
Tickner, J. Ann. 2001. Gendering World Politics: Issues and Approaches in the Post-Cold War Era. New York: Columbia University Press.
Tomlinson, John. 1991. Cultural Imperialism. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Townsend, J. G., etc. 1999. “Empowerment Matters: Understanding Power.” In Women and Power: Fighting Patriarchies and Power, eds. Townsend, J.G., E. Zapata, J. Rowlands, P. Alberti, and M. Mercado, Chapter 2. London: Zed Books.
Trinh T., Minh-ha. 1994. “Not You/Like You: Postcolonial Women and the Interlocking Questions of Identity and Difference.” In Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory, eds. Patrick Williams and Laura Chrisman, 415-19. New York: Columbia University Press.
_________. 1989. Women, Native, Other: Writing Postcoloniality and Feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Turpin, Jennifer. 1998. “Many Faces: Women Confronting War.” In The Women and War Reader, eds. Lois Ann Lorentzen and Jennifer Turpin, 3-18. New York: New York University Press.
Ueno, Chizuko (English edition). 2004. Nationalism and Gender. Melbourne: Trans Pacific Press.
U.S. Department of State. 2002. Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000: Trafficking in Persons Report 2002. Available online at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/10815.pdf
_________. 2001. Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000:Trafficking in Persons Report 2001. Available online at
Library of Congress. 2006a.
http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+kr0023 _________. 2006b. http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?cstdy:1:./temp/~frd_AcBF
Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure. Available online at
van Zoonen, L. 1994. Feminist Media Studies. London: Sage.
Vanaspong, Chitraporn. 2002. “A Portrait of the Lady: the Portrayal of Thailand and Its Prostitutes in the International Media.” In Transnational Prostitution: Changing Global Patterns, eds. Susanne Thorbek and Bandana Pattanaik, 139-55. London: Zed Books.
Walby, Sylbia. 1996. “Women and Nation.” In Mapping the Nation, ed. Gopal Balakrishnan, 235-54. London: Verso.
Waller, Maguerite R. and Jenniffer Rycenga. eds. 2000. Frontline Feminisms: Women, War, and Resistance. Garland Publishing, Inc.
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 2000. “The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System.” In The Globalization Reader, eds. Frank J. Lechner and John Boli, 57-63. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Warner, Daniel. 1999. “Searching for Responsibility/Community in International Relations.” In Moral Spaces: Rethinking Ethics and World Politics, eds. David Campbell and Michael J. Shapiro, 1-28. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Wells, Kenneth M. 1999. “The Price of Legitimacy: Women and the K.nuhoe Movement, 1927-1931.” In Colonial Modernity in Korea, eds. Gi-Wook Shin and Michael Robinson, 191-220. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wenk, Silke. 2000. “Gendered Representations of the Nation’s Past and Future.” In Gendered Nations, eds. Ida Blom, Karen Hagemann, and Catherine Hall, 63-
77. New York: Berg.
West, Lois A. 1997. “Introduction: Feminism Constructs Nationalism.” In Feminist Nationalism, ed. Lois A. West, xi-xxxvi. New York: Routledge.
Whittier, Nancy. 1995. Feminist Generations: Radical Women’s Movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Wiegman, Robyn. 2002. “Introduction: On Location.” In Women’s Studies on Its Own, ed. Robyn Wiegman, 1-44. Dunham, NC: Duke University Press.
_________. 2001. “Women’s Studies: Interdisciplinary Imperatives, Again.” Feminist Studies 27(2):514-18.
Wijers, Marjan. 1998. “Women, Labor, and Migration: The Position of Trafficked Women and Strategies for Support.” In Global Sex Workers: Right, Resistance, and Redefinition, eds. Kamala Kempadoo and Jo Doezema, 69-78. New York: Routledge
Wilson, Rob, and Wimal Dissanayake. 1996. Global/Local. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
WREI. 2000. Women in the Military: Where They Stand. Women in the Military Project Report for the Women’s Research & Education Institute.
Yang, Hyunah. 1997. “Revisiting the Issues of Korean Military Comfort Women.” Positions 5(1):51-71.
___________. 1998. “Re-membering the Korean Military Comfort Women: Nationalism, Sexuality, and Silencing.” In Dangerous Women, eds. Elaine H. Kim and Chungmoo Choi, 123-40. New York: Routledge. Young, Robert J.C. 2001. Postcolonialism: A Historical Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Yim, Yong Soon. 1982. “U.S. Strategic Doctrine, Arms Transfer Policy, and South Korea.” In U.S.- Korean Relations 1882-1982, ed. Kwak Tae-Hwan, 282-320. Seoul: Kyungnam University Press.
Yom, Sue Sum. 2004. “Where the Girls Are: The Management of Venereal Disease by United States Military Forces in Vietnam.” Literature and Medicine 23(1):6-87.
Yoon, Bang-Soon. 2001. “Democratization and Gender Politics in South Korea.” In Gender, Globalization, and Democratization, eds. Rita Mae Kelly et al, 171-
93. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Yoshiaki, Yoshimi. 2000. Comfort Women: Sexual Slavery in the Japanese Military During the World War II. New York: Columbia University Press.
Young, Iris M. 2003. “The Logic of Masculinist Protections on the Current Security State.” Signs 29(1):1-25.
Young, Robert J.C. 2001. Postcolonialism: A Historical Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Yuh, Ji-Yeon. 2002. Beyond the Shadow of Camptown: Korean Military Brides in America. New York: New York University Press.
_________. 1999. “Out of Shadows: Camptown Women, Military Brides and Korean (American) Communities.” Hitting Critical Mass 6(1):13-34.
Yuval-Davis, Nira. 2001. “Nationalism, Feminism and Gender Relations.” In Understanding Nationalism, eds. Montserrat Guibernau and John Hutchinson, 120-41. Cambridge: Polity.
_________. 1997. Gender and Nation. London: Sage.
Yuval-Davis, Nira and Floya Anthias. 1989. Women-Nation-State. London: Macmillian.
Yuval-Davis, Nira and Pnina Werbner, eds. 1999. Women, Citizenship, and Difference. London: Zed Books.
Zane, Kathleen. 1998. “Reflection on a Yellow Eye: Asian I (\Eye/) Cons and Cosmetic Surgery.” In Talking Visions: Multicultural Feminism in a Transnational Age, ed. Ella Shohat, 161-86. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Books and Articles in Korean
Adler, Mika Joseph. 2000. “A Study on Korean NGO’s Activism regarding American Soldiers’ Crimes (Chuhan Mik.nB.mjae-ae Daehan Hankuk NGO.i Hwaldongae Kwanhan Y.n’gu).” MA Thesis at Yonsei University of Seoul.
Ahn, Ilsoon. 1996. “The USFK and Prostitution in Korea.” In Great Army, Great Father (Widaehan Kundae, Widaehan Ab.ji: Han’guges..i Migukkundaewa Maech’un), ed. T.H. Yu. Seoul: Korean Church Women United.
__________. 1995. Ppaet-p.l (Quicksand). Seoul: Konggan Media and Publishing Group.
Baek, Jae Hee. 2000. “A Study about Foreign Women Workers Engaged in Sex Industries: Focusing on Filipino Women in Korea (Oekuk-y.s.ng.i Hankuk S.ngsan.p Yu-ip-e Kwanhan Y.nku).” MA Thesis at Ewha Womans University of Korea.
Chang, Ha-jin. 2006. “Koh Hwang-kyung.” Available online at
Chang, P’il-hwa and Cho Hy.ng. 1991. “Sexuality in Korea: Sexuality Culture of Korean Men.” Women’s Studies Review (Y.s.ng Y.nku) 8:127-70.
_____. 1990. “Perspectives on prostitution in Korean Legislature: 1948- 89 (Kukhoe Sokirogae Natanan Y.s.ngj.ngch’aek Sskak: Maemaechunae Daehay.: 1948-89).” Women’s Studies Review (Y.s.nghak Nonch’ip) 7:83-100.
Cho, S.ngsuk. 1997. “Military Culture and Men. (Kundae Munhwaya Nams.ng).” In Men and Korean Society, eds. Korean Women Social Research, 155-85. Seoul: Cultural Research Press.
Ch.ng, Hee-jin. 1999. “Women’s Human Rights, Who Can be Alive When Dead (Chuk.ya San.nY.s.ngd.l.i Ink.n).” In History of Korean Women’s Human Rights Movements, ed, Korean Women Hot Line, 301-58. Seoul: Han-wul.
Ch.ng, Hyun-bak. 2003. Nation and Feminism (Minjok-kwa P’aeminism). Seoul: Tangdae.
Ch.n, Ky.ng-il. 1991. “Camptowns’ pro-American Organizations Korean American Friendship Society (Kijich’on.i Ch’inmijojik Hanmich’ins.nhoe).” Mal 65: 170-73.
Ch.ng, S.ng-g.n. 1967. “Current Situations of Korean Prostitutes and Countermeasures (.rinara Yullak Y.s.ng.iH.nhwaggwa K.Daechaek).” Pophak-nonchong 8: 65-87.
DacuInfo. 2004. Exploring Shameful American Culture in South Korea (Pukkur..n Mikuk Munhwa Tapsaki). Seoul: Bookis.
Han’guk Y.s.ngy.n’guso. 1999. History of Our Women (Uri Y.s.ng.i .ksa). Seoul: Ch’.ngn.nsa.
Hwang, J.ng-mi. 2002. “The Construction of the Government and Women after Liberation (1946-1960): Focusing on the Women’s Bureau (Haebangh.Choki Kukkajiku-.iH.ngs.ngkwa Y.s.ng (1946-1969): Puny.kuk.l Chungssim.ro).” Hankuk-hakbo 109.
Kang, J.ng-suk. 1999. “Women’s Movement Under the Japanese Occupation (Iljae-Kangj.mkihaui Y.s.ng .ndong).” History of Our Women (Uri Y.s.ng.i .ksa), 329-57. Seoul: Ch’.ngn.nsa.
Kang, Nam-Ssik. 2004. “The Issues and Directions of the Korean Women’s Movement (Hankuk Y.s.ng.ndongui Jaengj.mkwa Banghwan).” The Korean Women’s Studies Fall Conference 2004.
Kim, Eun-Shil. 1994. “National Discourses and Women: Critical Reading on Culture, Power, and Subjectivity.” Korean Women’s Studies 10:18-52.
_________. 2002. “Globalization, Nation-State and Women’s Sexualities (Chiguhwa, Kukminkukka, K.rigo Y.s.ng.i Ssekssu.lliti).” Women’s Studies Review 19: 29-46. Korean Women’s Institute, Ewha Womans University.
Kim Jae-su. 1980. “A Socio-geographical Study on Kijich’on (Kichich.nae Kwanhan Sahoejirihakok Y.nku).” Chirihak-y.nku 5:274-94.
Kim, Jae-jun. 1970. “Nation, Congress, and Security (Kungmin, Kukhoe, Anbo).” Sindong-a (September): 140-47.
Kim Jin-song. 1999. Allow the Dance Hall in Seoul: The Construction of Modernity (Seoulae Dancehall.lH.hara). Seoul: H.nssil-munhwa Y.n-gu.
Kim, S.k-chun. 1996. The State and Administration of the USAFGIK (Mikunj.ngssidae-.i Kuk-kawa Haengj.ng). Seoul: Ewha Womans University.
Kim, Tong-chun. 2000. Shadow of Modernity: Korea’s Modernity and Nationalism (K.ndae.iK.n.l: Hankuk.iK.ndaes.ngkwa Minsokj.i). Seoul: Tangdae.
Kim, Y.n-Ja. 2005. Big Sister at America Town (America Town Wang.ni: Jukki Obunj.nkkaji Ak.l Ss’.da). Seoul: Samin Press
_________. 1995. “The Shaking Ground.” In Great Army, Great Father: Militarized Prostitution in South Korea: Life in GI Town, eds, Durebang and the Korea Church Women United, 9-11.
Korean National Assembly. 2000. The Annual Report.
KNTO (Korea National Tourism Organization) “Introduction of the Organization.” Available online at http://www.knto.or.kr/gs/yh/gsyh_av0.jsp
Koyama, Ikumi. 1996. “A Study of the Influence of Military Service Experience on Korean Men’s Consciousness.” Masters’ Thesis at Yonsei University.
Kwon, Hyuk-b.m. 2004. Succeeding from the Nation (Kungmin.robut’..i T’alt’oe). Seoul: Samin Press.
Lee, Na-Young. 2005. “Prostitution: For Feminist Radical Sexual Politics (Ssongmaemae: Y.s.ngju-ui S.ngj.ngchihak.l Wihan Ssiron).” Journal of Korean Women’s Studies 21(1):41-85.
MBC (Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation). 2003. We can Talk about it Now: Sex Alliance and Camptowns Cleansing Campaign, February11th (Ijen.n Malhalsu Itda: Sex Tongmaeng Kijich’on Ch.nghwaundong). Seoul: MBC.
Ministry of Gender Equality (MOGE). 2006. Women’s History Knowledge System. Available online at http://www.womenshistory.re.kr:7070/.
_________. 2003a. Investigation on Trafficking in Foreign Women (Oekuky.s.ng Inssinmaemae Ssilt’ae Josa).
_________. 2003b. Resource Materials Related to Comfort Women I.
_________. 2001. Research on Policy of Prohibition of Prostitution (S.ngmaemae Bangjidaechaek Y.nku).
Ministry of Gender Equality & Family. 2005. “Anniversary Report on the Anti-prostitution Law and its Enforcement September 12.” Available online at http://english.mogef.go.kr/.
Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea. 2000. Yearbook of Health and Welfare Statistics.
Ministry of Health and Social Affairs (MHSA). 1988. Yearbook of Public Health and Social Statistics (Pok.nssahoe T’onggae Y.nbo).
_________. 1987. History of Woman Administration for Forty Years. Seoul.
_________. 1969. Yearbook of Public Health and Social Statistics (Pok.nssahoe T’onggae Y.nbo).
Min, K.ng-ja. 1999. “The History of Korean Women’s Movement against Prostitution, 1970-1998 (Hankuk Maechuny..s.ng .ndongsa).” In History of Korean Women’s Human Rights Movements, ed. Korean Women Hot Line, 239-99. Seoul: Han-wul.
Pak, M.ng-rim. 1996. “Modernity Project and Korea’s Nationalism (K.ndaehwa P’rojaekthwa Hankuk.i Minsokju-.i).” In Critique on Korea’s Modern and Modernity, 311-48. Seoul: Y.ksa-bip’.ngsa.
Pak, Jong-Seong. 1994. Prostitution in Korea (Han’guk.i Maech’un). Seoul: Ingansarang Press.
Pyun, Hwasoon. 1997. “The Impacts of Patriarchal Militarism on Women’s Lives (Kabuchangj.k Kunsamunhwaka Y.s.ng.i Salmae Michin Y.nghwang). ” Yonsei Women’s Study 3:145-72.
Sin, O-s.ng. 1989. “Study on the Public Health and Medical Care after the Korean War, 1945-1959 (Hankukch.njaeng-j.nhu-.i Bok.n.iry.-ae Kwanhan Y.n’gu).” MA Thesis at Seoul National University of Korea.
Sin, Tong-ho. 1970. “The Reduction of U.S. Troops and the Camptown Economy (Migungamch’ukkwa Kijich’on Ky.ngje).” W.lgansaw.l 4(8):30-31.
Sin, Tong-wuk. 2000. “An Empire of Dollar with Shell Only (Kk.bdegiman Nam.n ‘dal..i Cheguk).” Han’gy.re 21 (July 13):38-39.
S.ng, Y.ng-so and Pong-yul Chang. 1970. “T’.kjip: chuhanmigungamch’ukkwa Han’gug.i anbo (Special: The Reduction of U.S. Troops and Korean Security).” Sindong-a (September): 128-39.
S.ngmun-Chulp’ansa P’unjip-bu. 1999. The Hidden History of Korea Tourism 50 Years (Hankuk-kwanggang Bisa 50 Y.n). Seoul: Hankuk Y.haeng Sinmunsa.
Soh, Ji-Young. 2004. “Entertainment Customs and Female Sexuality in Colonial Korea: Focusing on Kisaeng and Cafe Waitress (Ssikmiji K.ndae Y.h.ng P’ungsok-kwa Y.s.ng Ssaessu.liti).” Yoksa-bip’.ng, 132-68.
W.n, Mihae. 2004. “Feminist Sexual Politics: Beyond Prohibition of Prostitution (Y.ns.ngju-.iS.ngj.ngchihak: K.nj.l.lN.m.).” Journal of Feminist Theories and Practices 10:34-55.
Yamashida, Yong-ae. 1997. “The Colonial Occupation and Deployment of the Licensed Prostitution (Ssingminji Jibaew.i Kongchang Jaedo.iJ.n’gae).” Society and History 51:143-81.
Yi, Imha. 2004a. The Korean War and Gende (Hankuk Chonjaengkwa Jaendo). Seoul: Sohaemunjip.
______. 2004b. “U.S. Occupation in East Asia and Sexuality (Mikun-ui Tongassia Judunkwa Ssaekssuoliti).” In East Asia, Modernity, and Discovery of Women, 259-99. Seoul: Chong-oram.
______. 2004c. “The Korean War and Recruiting Gender and Sexuality (Hankuk Chonjaengkwa Yosongsong-songui Tongwon).” Study of History 14:107-48.
Yi, (Pak) Hae-kyong. 2001. “Feminist Question of What the Progressive is (Y.s.ngju-.i, Jinbor.l Munnunta).” Women and Society 12:6-12. Seoul: Changjak-kwa Bip’.ng.
Yi, So-hee. 2001. “The U.S. Crimes and the History of Resistance (Mikun Bomjae, Kurigo Johangui Yoksa).” Nog.lli and Maehwangni, 272-91. Seoul: Kipp.n Chayu.
Yi, Hyo-jae. 1996. The Korean Women’s Movement, Past and Present (Hankuk.i Y.s.ngundong.i .jaewa On.l). Seoul: Ch.ng-usa.
Yi, Hyun-suk. 1992. The History of Korean Church Women United, 25 Years (Hankuk Ky.hoey.s.ng Yonhaphoe 25 Y.nsa). Seoul: KCWU.
Yi, Pae-y.ng, 1996. “Changes in Women’s Lives and Gender Consciences under the
U.S. Military Government in South Korea, 1945-48 (Mikunj.ngki Y.ns.ng Ssaenghwal.iP.nmo-wa Y.s.ng.isik,1945-48).” Y.ksa-hakbo 150:159-209.
Yi Sung-hui. 1994. Women’s Movement and Political Theory (Y.s.ngundongkwa Ch.ngch’i Iron). Seoul: Nolt..
Y., Sun-Ju. 1999. “Gender Policy Under the Japanese Occupation and Japanese Comfort Women (Iljemalki- Y.s.ng J.ngch’aekkwa Ilbonkun Wianbu).” Han’guk Y.s.ngy.n’guso, 359-95.
Yu Hae-J.ng. 1999. “Gender Policy Under the Japanese Occupation (Iljae-Ssingmjiha.iY.s.ng J.ngch’aek).” Han’guk Y.s.ngy.n’guso, 275-300.
Yun, Jong-ran. 2003. The History of the Christian Women’s Movement (Hankuk Kidoky.Y.s.ngundong.iY.ksa). Seoul: Kukhak Charyowon.
Yun, Jong-suk. 2004. “For the Turning Point of the Progressive Women’s Movement (Chinbojok Yosongundongui Jonhwanul Wihan Mosaek).” Creativity and Critique 125:55-69. Seoul: Changjak-kwa Bip’ong.
Yu, Ki-Song. 1990. “Kijich’on Community Movement, Durebang (Kijich’on Kongdongchae.ndong, Durebang).” Mal Magazine 52:116-20.
Yun, Taek-Lim. 1994. “Nationalist Discourse and Women: Toward Feminist Historiography (Minchokchu-.i Damnonkwa Y.s.ng).” Journal of Korean Women’s Studies 10:86-119.
Newsletters/Pamphlets/Reports and Other Resource Materials originated from NGOs
Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW). 1999. “Prostitutes Work, But Do They Consent?” http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/catw
Chong-Dae-Hyup. 2004. Testimony of Comfort Women 6. Seoul: Women and Human Rights (Y.ksar.l Mandn.n Iyaki 6: Ilbonkun Wianbu J.ng.njip). Seoul: Y.ns.ngkwa Inkw.n.
_________. 2003-4. Newsletters and Pamphlets.
_________. 2002-4. Resource Materials.
_________. 1999. The Past, Present, and Future of the Movement for Comfort Women. Educational Resource Material I.
_________. 1992. Resource Material of Chongsindae II.
Committee of Nog.llri to Maehyangri (CNM). 2001. History of the Korean People’s Movement for Solution of the Problems of U.S. Forces in Korea (Mikunmunjae Haek.l.l Wihan Hankuk Minjung .ndong). Seoul: Kipp.n Chayu.
Durebang (My Sister’s Place). 2005. Educational Resource Material for Uprooting Prostitution (S.ngmaemae Mokj.k.i Inssinmaemae Kunj.l.l Wihan Char.jip).
_________. 2004. Educational Resource Material for Uprooting Prostitution in Northern Ky.nggi Province (S.ngmaemae Mokj.k.i Inssinmaemae Kunj.l.l Wihan Char.jip).
_________. 2003-4. Pamphlets and Brochures.
_________. 2003a. “Reports on Support Projects for Victimized Women in U.S Military Camptowns.”
_________. 2003b. Research on Amerasian Children in Kijich’on (Kijich’on H.ny.lin Inkw.n Ssiltae Chosa).
_________. 2003c. Educational Resource Material for Uprooting Prostitution in Northern Gyeonggi Province (S.ngmaemae Mokj.k.i Inssinmaemae Kunj.l.l Wihan Char.jip). Assisted by Kyonggi Provincial Government II
_________. 2001. Stories of Durebang: 15 Anniversary Celebration Resource Materials (Durebang Iyaki).
_________. 1995. Great Army, Great Father: Militarized Prostitution in South Korea; Life in GI Town (Widaehan Kundae, Widaehan Ab.ji: Han’guges..i Migukkundaewa Maech’un).
_________. 1986-2004. Newsletters of My Sister’s Place.
East Asia-US Women’s Network for Anti-Militarism. 2002. “Militarism and Women’s rights.” 2002 Seoul International Conference.
Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women (GAATW). 1994. “A Proposal to Replace the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others.” Utrecht, par 11.2.
Ky.nggi-do. 2003. Brochure for Protection of Women Migrant Workers’ Rights & Prevention of Their Sex Trade Involvement.
Hansori Association. 2003. Project of Networking for Supporting Victims of Prostitutes (S.ngmaemae P’ihaey.s.ng.l Wihan Ch.nkuky.nkaemang Guchuksa.p). Assisted by the Ministry of Gender Equality.
_________. 2003-4. Pamphlets and Newsletters.
Human Rights Caucus. 1999. “Recommendations and Contemporary on the Draft Protocol to Combat International Trafficking in Women and Children Supplementary to the Draft Convention on Transnational Organized Crime.” http://www.hrlawgroup.org
Joint Committee of Migrant Workers in Korea (JCMWK). 2001. The Report on the Migrant Workers in Korea (Oekukin Nodongja Inkw.n Bogos.). Seoul: Dasan Gulbang.
_________. 2001-4. Brochures and Newsletters.
Korean Church Women United (KCWU). 1999. A Fieldwork Report on Trafficked Women in Korea (Hankuk.i Inssinmaemae H.nhwang).
_________. 1988. Women and Tourism Culture: Focusing on Cheju Island. (Y.s.ngkwa Kwan’gang Munhwa: Chejuji.k.l Chungssim.ro).
_________. 1987. Prostitution and Women’s Movement (Maech’un Munjaewa Y.s.ng.ndong).
_________. 1984. Kisaeng Tourism (Kisaeng Kwan’gwang).
_________. 1968-2004. Pamphlets, Brochures, and Newsletters.
Korean Women’s Associations United (KWAU). 2002a. Discussion for Elimination of Trafficking in Women and the US Military Prostitution. Symposium Materials (Inssinmaemae K.nj.l.lwihan T’oronhoe Char.jip).
_________. 2002b. Kink.p T’oronhoe-Hankuk Ch.ngbu-u S.ngmaemaebangjidaechaek .dikkaji Watna.
_________. 2002-5. Pamphlets and Newsletters.
_________. 1998. Open Hope: The History of KWAU 10 Years (Y.lin Huimang, Hankuk Y.y.n Ssipn.nsa). Seoul: Dongd.k University.
Korean Women’s Development Institute (KWDI). 2001. “A Study to Ensure the Migrant Female Workers’ Rights (Oekukin Y.s.ngnotongja Inkw.n Bojang Y.nku).”
_________. 1998. Study on Prostitution in the Service Industry (under the direction of
Wha Sun Byun).
_________. 2000-5. Brochures and Pamphlets.
Korea Truth Commission on U.S. Military Massacres of Civilians during the Korean
War. 2002. The Truth of History: U.S. Military Massacres of Korean Civilians.
Magdalena House. 2003. Post-Prostitution: Women Preparing the Future (T’als.ngmaemae, Miraer.l Chunbiha.nY.s.ngd.l). Sponsored by the
Ministry of Gender Equality.
_________. 2002. Courageous Women Who Ride on Wolf. Seoul: Samin.
_________. 2000. Magdalena, Magdalena? Seoul: Gaema Sew.n.
_________. 2000-4. Brochures and Newsletters.
National Campaign for Eradication of Crimes by U.S. Troops in Korea (National
Campaign). 2003. The 10th Anniversary Celebration Resource Materials
_________. 2002. Yun K.m-yi, Unforgettable Name: Resource Materials for the Last Yun (Ikijmot’al IrumYun K.m-yi). _________. 1999. History of Endless Pain: Crimes by U.S. Troops in Korea (Kk.nnajian.n Ap’.m.Y.ksa: Mikun B.mjoe). Seoul: Gaema S.w.n. _________. 1994-2004. Newsletters. Pan-South Korea Solution Committee against U.S. Base Extension in Pyeongtaek (KCPT). 2006. Pamphlet and Petition for Solidarity. http://antigizi.or.kr/ Saeumto (Sprouting Land). 2003-4. Pamphlets and Newsletters. _________. 2001a. “Educational Material for Volunteers in Saewoomtuh and Activists in the U.S. Military Camptowns.” Unpublished Manuscript.
_________. 2001b. Research on Conditions of Prostitution in Ky.nggi Province for Alternative Policy (Ky.nggi-jiyok Maechun Y.s.ngae Daehan Ssilt’ae Josa). Sponsored by the Ky.nggi Provincial Government.
_________. 1999. Lives in Kijich’on: U.S Military Camptown in Korea._________. 1996. Conditions Facing Prostitutes in U.S. Military Camptowns.Saeumto and Human Rights Solidarity for Woman and Migration in Korea. 2001. Sex
Trafficking Eradication Project: Networking Against the Asian Sex Industry and Promoting Anti-Sex Trafficking Legislation. International Symposium Resource Materials (held in St. Francisco Center, Seoul, Korea, October 9-11, 2001.)
STV, Foundation Against Trafficking in Women. 1995. News Bulletin 1 March. Sunflower. 2003. Newsletters.265
Women’s International Network News, Spring 99, 25(2):90. Women Migrants Human Rights Center. 2004. Sex Education for Women Migrants:
The Owner of My Body is Me (Oekukin Y.s.ngnotongja Ss.ngkoyuk Charojip) . Sponsored by the Ministry of Gender Equality. _________. 2003-4. Newsletters and Pamphlets.
265 Sunflower is a counseling center for foreign women workers in KCWU (Korean Church Women United). It opened on May 1996 “based on the spirit of release from all differentiation and suppression” of “migrant female workers.”
Magazines and Newspapers
Asia and Pacific Rim European and Pacific Stars and Strips (Stars and Stripes) Chosun Ilbo (Chosun Daily) Daily Sports Dong-a Ilbo (Daily) Dong-a Weekly Hankyoreh Sinmun (Daily) Hankyoreh Weekly Han’guk Ilbo Ilyosisa Korea Herald Kugmin Ilbo Ky.nghyang Ilbo Los Angeles Times Mal Magazine Manila Times National Review Ohmynews People’s Daily Puin Ilbo Segye Ilbo Seoul Ilbo Sindong-a (Monthly) Strategy Page The Daily Tribune The Manila Times The Star Time Asia Washington Post Weekly Hankyoreh 21 (Weekly Hankyoreh)
Camp Arirang. 1995. (Directed by Diana S. Lee and Grace Yoonkyung Lee)
The Women Outside: Korean Women and the U.S. Military. 1996. (Directed by J.T. Takagi and Hye Jung Park)
I and Owl. 2003. (Made by Durebang)
MBC. Documentary Series about Migrant Workers in Korea. 2002. SBS. Shakers of Slavery Prostitution. 2002.
Civil Network for Peaceful Korea: http://www.peacekorea.org
Chosun Daily Newspaper: http://www.chosun.com
Coalition Against Trafficking in Women-Asia Pacific (CATW-AP):
http://www.catw-ap.org/ Department of Foreign Affairs of Korea: http://www.moj.go.kr/immi Donga Daily Newspaper: http://www.donga.com Durebang: http://durebang.org Global Security: http://www.globalsecurity.org Hansori: http://www.han-sori.org/ (For uprooting prostitution) Hankyoreh Newspaper: http://www.hani.or.kr International Organization for Migration (IOM). http://www.iom.ch/doc/trafficking Joint Committee of Migrant Workers in Korea http://www.jcmk.org KCWU (Korea Church Women United): http://www.kcwu.org KNTO (Korea National Tourism Organization)
http://www.knto.or.kr/gs/yh/gsyh_av0.jsp Korea Center of Human Rights for Foreign Workers: http://migrant114.org/ KWAU (Korea Women’s Associations United): http://www.women21.or.kr/ KWDI (Korean Women’s Development Institute): http://kwdi.re.kr/ Magdalena House http://www.magdalenahouse.org/ Ministry of Gender Equality: http://www.moge.go.kr/
Ministry of Justice of Korea (Immigration Bureau): http://www.moj.go.kr/immi/ National Campaign for Eradication of Crimes by U.S. Troops in Korea:
Ohmynews (Internet News): http://www.ohmynews. com
Peace and Human Rights Network: http://www.onespark.or.kr/
People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy: http://www.peoplepower21.org
Stars and Stripes: http://www.estripes.com/
The Corean NGO Times: http://www. ngotimes. Net
U.S. Department of State: http://www.state.gov/ WAW (Women Against War) http://www.kwaw.orgWomen Making Peace: http://www.peacewomen.or.kr/
Women Migrants Human Rights Center: http://www.wmigrant.org
Women News: http://www.womennews.co.kr.
List of Pictures