News yesterday of “the latest celebrity to die in a recent series of suicides” — Transgender Commits Suicide.
One can only imagine the hardship of growing up with same-sex attraction let alone gender-identity issues in Korea, a country whose culture demands conformity. And whether you call it a sex-change operation or gender-realignment surgery, you’ll agree that the procedure is not to be undertaken lightly and could have profound psychological ramifications even in a society more tolerant of such issues.
Alas, there is no place for such folks here in Korea as there is in the societies of Southeast Asia, as I’ve blogged about before — The Thai (and Vietnamese) Way and Gays. Perhaps there was in pre-modern Korea, if we are to believe the movie Wang-ui namja (2005).
Whatever the case, let us remember these words attributed to either Plato or Philo of Alexandria: “Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.”
07/10/2008 at 2:49 pm Permalink
I’m not so sure that Southeast Asia and Korea should be either rebuked or lauded for an idea of “place” for transgendered people, nor should they be confused with gay people. Although both are queer, the identifications and sexual orientations are quite different. It seems to me that Korea (along with many other “conservative” countries such as Iran, Thailand, Vietnam – but more on those last two in a second) is more open to transgendered and transsexual people than to homosexuals. Transsexual people can be more easily “understood” within some cultures as having the “right” orientation (i.e. towards people of the opposite gender) but the “wrong” sex – gender reassignment/sex change surgery (both are, I find, accurate descriptions of what takes place) so the surgery “corrects” the problem of having an “incorrectly gendered” body. In short, the surgery allows people’s gender and sex to be realigned and normative, so that people born as women but gendered as male actually become male, turning their “homosexual” urge for other women into “proper” sexual urges (still for women – even though this is simplifying things. There are lots of transsexual and transgendered people whose orientations do not fit this model, but I digress . . .) and vice-versa. Witness the differing reactions to Harisu and to Hong Suk-chon when he came out. Yes, Hong is relatively accepted now, but it was a long, hard slog, and there’s still rampant discrimination against homosexuals. Harisu, comparatively, has been more easily assimilated by Korean culture because when “he” became a she, she took on a hyper-feminine role in society, including marriage to a (genetic and psychological) male. Homosexuals, in the Korean social mix, are deviants whose full acceptance depends on abandoning their orientation, while transsexual people can find at least some acceptance because they’re attempting to become “normative” in their sexuality. We should also remember that all forms of transgendered identification occupy a very small segment of the population, making them exceptions that prove the rule, rather than the kind of dangerous social threat that some parts of society see in homosexuality (still rare but comparatively more common.) I would note, too, that the idea of Vietnamese and Thai society as openly embracing and accepting homosexuality and different genders is not necessarily true. Sure, transgendered people are very “out” and can be seen on the streets – but this does not translate into any sort of substantive incorporation into broader society(PA Jackson, G Sullivan 1999, MJ Sinnott 2004, etc). Visibility in the foreigner-oriented “gay bar” scene and in the entertainment industry does not equal real rights in society. Alternate sexualities are only acceptable in certain contexts. One could argue that having a space in which to act out one’s non-normative self is wonderful and freeing, but I would say it is also confining and stifling, prohibiting people who are homosexual from being themselves outside that narrowly defined context.
Speaking of context, while a transgendered identity may make for emotional difficulties, it would seem a bit of a jump to conclude that that played a role in her decision to commit suicide. If anything, being post-op reduces the risk of suicide, so the assumption that her gender issues were the deciding factor here seems unfair.
In any case, Jang’s death is very sad. May she rest in peace.
08/10/2008 at 9:01 am Permalink
Korean society was very tolerant of homosexuality before missionaries came.
09/10/2008 at 1:07 am Permalink
I suppose it depends on your definition of “tolerant” – could you elaborate?
King Hyegong might have disagreed in light of the fact that his “effeminate” habits were cited as one reason for his murder. And I’m not sure the midong would have thought that their lowly status was a sign of acceptance in broader Korean society. There’s very little in the historical record about homosexuality, but certainly the Confucian cultural atmosphere of the Joseon period could hardly be called “tolerant” of homosexuality – the emphasis on family and bloodlines would make non-reproductive relationships (including those that resulted in children who didn’t meet the strict definition for legal heirs) hard to justify.
I’m not familiar enough with the history of missionary work here in Korea, but my impression is that missionaries did not seem very concerned with stamping out homosexuality . . . can anybody point us in the direction of relevant readings?