Constitutional Court Rules Military Service Mandatory Only For Men

Article from Yonhap News:

“Constitutional Court Unanimously Rules Military Service Mandatory Only for Men”

On March 11, 2014, the Constitutional Court reaffirmed the constitutionality of the military draft law imposing mandatory military service only on able-bodied men.

The verdict came after 22 year-old Lim, who received a draft notice in 2011, filed a petition to review the constitutionality of Article 3.1 of the Military Draft Act. Judges unanimously ruled that the current law is congruous with the constitution.

Article 3.1 of the Military Draft Act states that according to the constitution and the Military Draft Act, men must faithfully serve obligatory military service as citizens of the Republic of Korea.

Photo of the inside of the Constitutional Court

In its ruling, the court said, “Men are more physically fit for combat. Although there are women with comparable physical ability, physiological conditions including pregnancy and childbirth can hinder them during training sessions and combat support missions. Therefore, the military draft law that applies only to men cannot be judged as arbitrary.”

In bolstering its decision, the judges said in the verdict, “Of about 70 countries which maintain conscription systems, only a few countries including Israel, impose military service on both men and women. If women are required to serve in the military, crimes such as sexual harassment, abuse of the line of command, disruption of the power relationship, and lax discipline could occur in military units, which have been organized around men.”

Two petitions were previously filed with the constitutional court in October 2010 and June 2011 to challenge the validity of the military draft law. The court ruled in both cases that the article in question complied with the constitution.

While two judges in the 2010 petition and one judge in the 2011 petition ruled the law unconstitutional, this time the court ruled unanimously on the constitutionality of the law.

In the 2011 petition, Lim claimed that the current law is discriminatory by imposing compulsory military service only on men. He stated that having to complete two years of military service puts men at a disadvantage as they lag behind women in preparing themselves for employment at an important juncture of life, and that women are physically strong enough to complete military service.

military training

Comments from Naver:


I think the ruling is the evidence that shows the Ministry of Women is unnecessary. [Referring to the fact that many men feel the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family is steeped in feminism, and is conducting campaigns that show disregard for men, resulting in what many men claim is reverse gender discrimination.]


If so, why are women allowed to volunteer to serve in the military as commissioned or non-commissioned officers?

zetm****: [responding to above]

Women in Israel and Norway have to do their military service. Let’s suppose that Kimchi bitches are so feeble that they can’t serve as soldiers. Then why are they allowed to volunteer to serve as commissioned or non-commissioned officers in the military? If they are considered to be physically incapable, they should be banned from joining the military. This doesn’t make sense whatsoever. Kimchi bitches don’t even pay taxes for national defense like women in countries such as Germany and Taiwan do, nor do they have a high fertility rate. What the hell is going on?

cova****: [responding to duwo****]

Men have to serve in the military. But in an era of gender equality, two years of military service in your 20s takes a great toll on men. I think men who complete their duty should be given respect and certain privileges. Wouldn’t that be true equality?

mone****: [responding to duwo****]

There are many women in the military’s special force units. They undergo some of the harshest training together with their fellow male soldiers. The court said women can’t? Fuck them.

eheh****: [responding to duwo****]

Summing up the Constitutional Court’s ruling in one sentence: Women are inferior to men.

sh41****: [responding to duwo****]

If we follow the court’s logic, female soldiers currently serving in combat units are effectively men, and they are not subject to sexual harassment. What nonsense!


Duty and volunteering are different. For duty, they consider the average abilities of the group while volunteering occurs in exceptional circumstances. As there are some men who are physically unfit and exempted from the military service, it’s wrong to judge things as black-and-white.


Based on this ruling, let’s discharge all female non-commissioned and commissioned officers, and ban them from joining the military. Women are deemed unfit for the military service.


Then all women should be required to have babies by law.

loso****: [responding to above]

That sarcastic comment was first made in this context. Someone asked this woman why all women are exempted from the military service. She responded by saying that women contribute to the nation by having babies. [Putting legal obligation and private life decisions on the same line.]

gkwn****: [responding to haru****]

You don’t have to compare the military service to child birth. Just get women to do two years of community service. Women are useless in the military, so why should we even get them to serve? I doubt they can even shoot a rifle in a real battle.

pmj7****: [responding to haru****]

How can you compare military service to pregnancy? Do you think women get pregnant by themselves? And the low fertility rate should be blamed solely on women? Women become pregnant after mutual consent with their husbands. Those in their 20s who are still wet behind their ears, shut up.

ybk2****: [responding to haru****]

If the court’s verdict is justified, can it be interpreted as saying it’s not unfair when women are discriminated against in the workplace for being unsuitable for social activities due to physical conditions?


The answer to this situation is immigration…

kmac****: [responding to above]

I completed my military service. I am ready for your advice as to which country I should immigrate to.

kill****: [responding to muse****]

When I graduate from school, I want to get a job at a foreign company even if it is a small firm, and to live in a foreign country. I am serious about it. I’m tired of dealing with Kimchi bitches. I feel so ashamed to be born in this trashy Republic of Korea where being a man gets you penalties. If I make it big, I want to help my parents, my elder brother’s families immigrate. This country should collapse for real.

bkm1****: [responding to muse****]

Leave this country quickly. The Republic of Korea doesn’t need a bastard who hates working for the country and always whines.


I wonder whether the judges at the constitutional court finished their military service.


I heard many women have been at the top of their Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC). How should we view this in the context of the verdict?

Share This Article
Help us maintain a vibrant and dynamic discussion section that is accessible and enjoyable to the majority of our readers. Please review our Comment Policy »
  • Sarah

    “Men are more physically fit for combat. Although there are women with comparable physical ability, physiological conditions including pregnancy and childbirth can hinder them during training sessions and combat support missions. Therefore, the military draft law that applies only to men cannot be judged as arbitrary.”

    Yes, because every single Korean woman has no say when it comes to when or IF she even chooses to give birth. So incredibly sexist. Korean women should have to serve those two years as well.

    • A Gawd Dang Mongolian

      Not sexism. Stupidity. His main excuse was pregnancy and childbirth; as if there couldn’t be a situation where they’re not pregnant. It’s like he thinks babies just spontaneously grow in women’s bellies.

      • MeCampbell30

        Obviously the stork brings them. Everyone knows this.

    • Paulistano

      I think women shoudn’t serve. And neither men. I generally against conscription because It’s a waste of resources and time for everyone. But since S Korea is in a state of war, maybe It’s justified.

  • Dave Park

    I believe that when it comes to service and the defense of the nation, no able person should be discriminated against either by their gender or their sexuality.

    • 이순신

      I have met AZN male and female coppers in the past. IMO the female coppers are equivalent or more competent than their male counterparts.
      However in the military is a whole different ballgame.
      E.g what happens if a woman soldier is captured by the enemy, what happens to her and should their be a rescue mission to save her.

      • bigmamat

        Wouldn’t the military try to save any of their captured soldiers regardless of gender? Is it the Korean military’s position to leave their men behind? I don’t understand this reasoning at all. I’ve frankly never understood the reasoning behind thinking that brute strength alone should be necessary in a modern military environment. The right training and equipment is an equalizer for any kind of physical differences between men and women. A woman with a gun is just a deadly as a man. I think there are also studies that show women have a greater tolerance for pain than men.

        • Paulistano

          I kinda agree with you, but don’t forget that not all country can buy a thousand tomahawk missiles to protect their soldiers or purchase countless apaches and abrams like US, so modern military equipment is for few actually. Some countries resolve their military conflicts in the wild and old way and women are not included in the old way.

          • bigmamat

            Since Korea has the U.S. military at it’s disposal anyway don’t you think your point is moot. Other than that you mean the old way like women will be camp followers and cooks. How many centuries back are you thinking?

          • Paulistano

            I didn’t disagree with you, I just want to remember that your argument don’t make sense for all countries in the world.

            And not many centuries back actually. Pick the prime example of WW2. Woman had an essencial role in the war, but 95-98% that people that fighted in front were men. I don’t want to discredit women that fighted in front, actually, all know quite a lot famous brave girls that fought in WW1 and WW2, but women were encouraged to do other things like support. Some WW2 posters would tell this

          • bigmamat

            i understand. I was just kind of trolling you a little anyway. I’m sorry. I’m from the southern part of the U.S. where a lot of women know as much about guns and doing guy things as the men. My family is full of tomboys. My daughter likes nothing better than to kayak, fish, and hunt. Of course on average we’re all bigger than Asian women too. My daughter is 175 cm tall. She’s gorgeous but she’s a little scary.

          • Paulistano

            Oh hey, I’m sorry if I was a bit bitter too, when it comes to political and social discussions, I can’t hold my tongue even with unknown people. Well, I think I will not change my bitter in this forum, I just can’t. And what I hate the most is trolling comments (not yours) with the only pourpose to discredit people or country with fallacy, lies and no base source.

            Besides that, I REALLY wished to born in USA, hunting is something I really want to do. It’s a pity that my country don’t allow people to hunt with rifle.

          • bigmamat

            Well since we pretty much killed off all the natural predators it’s actually necessary in some areas for people to hunt. You don’t really even need a gun. I hit a deer last year with my car back in March. People do that around here all the time. Hit deer with their cars. It can really mess up your vehicle. Hunting with a bow is also popular too. A lot of people who love to hunt will hunt with a bow and then later with a gun. What country are you from?

          • Paulistano

            Yeah, hunting with a bow would be very interesting too, I guess my primate genes in hominidae still alive when it come to likes. I live in Brazil. São Paulo to be exactly.

            I don’t know about US, but here urban pigeons are serious issue, I find incredible that the goverment punish years in jail if the guy hunt and kill a pigeon and there are morons in the streets that give food (corn) to pigeons and the government don’t give a damn. Last time I checked, pigeons can bring more than 20 diseases, some are deadly and here in the cities like São Paulo It’s a invasion, It would be really a relief if the government do something, even allowing people to hunt, but no, pigeons are our cultural patrimony, what an ***.

          • bigmamat

            I’m sorry but that’s really pretty funny. Scary pigeons. Actually I hate the damned things myself. Last year they got into the soffit of my house and I had to rip it all down and put up new. We also hate those black birds. I think they’re English Starlings. They flock by the thousands. They run off all the other song birds. How about cats? Does Sao Paulo have a lot of stray cats? They could help cut down on the pigeon population. Of course the government won’t let you hunt in the middle of the city. That would just be too dangerous. Discharging a firearm anywhere near a lot of people can be very dangerous. Last year a little boy was killed on his way to a fireworks display because someone in the area fired off a weapon into the air. The bullet came down and hit him on top of the head. They never did find out who fired the shot.

          • Paulistano

            Nah, surprisingly, stray cats here are not numerous like stray dogs, that’s interesting. Every 5 minute walking on the street I see a dog, but not a cat.

            And, yeah, probably you are making sense here. Firing a rifle in a heavy populated city could be very dangerous, but maybe in rural areas it would be possible. Sad that the State is not apprehensible here.

          • bigmamat

            I guess there are no stray cats because there are so many stray dogs. Which would make me a little nervous. I’m not very fond of other people’s dogs. I was bitten pretty savagely by a friends dog a few years ago so I’m very cautious of them now.

        • jon777

          The reason is that men get a little over protective and stop using their brain when a woman is in danger. Doesn’t matter how good a woman is with a gun.

          • bigmamat

            Men only get that way about women because they are conditioned to think women need protecting.

          • jon777

            Doesn’t matter why.

          • bigmamat

            Yes it does. Don’t be obtuse. It matters because it continues to perpetuate the myth that women can’t take care of themselves and they need the benevolence and protection of men just to survive. Which they actually do by the way in a lot of countries, just not in mine. Welcome to the modern world where women can make choices based on something other than what kind of man they will marry and how many children they get stuck having to raise.

          • jon777

            No, it doesn’t. It means that men get distracted by womens presence. There are other things women can do except being on the front lines. Being a pilot, engineer, tactician/strategist etc.

          • bigmamat

            Yeah I get that to so what are you trying to say? Yeah women can serve in those roles and they should. Any man that can’t keep from being distracted in the middle of war won’t last long and shouldn’t be on the front lines either.

          • jon777

            That would mean no men on the battlefield. So as you can see, it’s not possible. Unless women take over all military roles.

  • Ruaraidh

    It’s not like every single man is stronger than every single woman, if it’s fitness and strength they’re really concerned about, why not screen selection by strength/fitness not sex. Idiots.

    • Paulistano

      Well, It’s easier to find strength/fitness in men than woman in think. Considering that men, generally, not strictly rule, are stronger than woman in natural course, It’s obvious that Army prefer men.

      Before you call me idiot, What I talked here It’s not nonsense, It’s science and evolution. Who knows when 50.000 years passed and men become weaker since they don’t use brute force anyway nowadays

      • Ruaraidh

        Men are stronger than women in general. But abnormally strong women and abnormally weak men both exist, so why should a weak man have to do service just because most other men are stronger than most women? Likewise why should a very strong women get out of service just because women as a group are weaker. It doesn’t make sense, and I can’t see how you can argue otherwise..

        • Paulistano

          Yes, Ruaraidh, I agree with your individual points, but I can’t agree how your points would be the solution here. What do you propose? Selecting one by one, woman or man, who has aptitude to serve the Army? I think that would cost MUCH more time and resources and The State wouldn’t like that. Since it’s easier to conscript only men due to their natural force than woman (again, there are exceptions), Armies prefer to choose one sexism over headache.

          Just remenber, I’m not defending what, especifically, korean army does, but it’s understandable what they do, but surely it’s not correct, or even justificable. I personally think that serving the Army should be voluntary, but since Korea has a conscription system, fitting all men and women would economic desastrous, just imagine a tiny country with 2 millions soldiers. No wonder why North Korea is in so bad shape economically speaking.

          • Ruaraidh

            Sure, I can see what you’re saying, but it’s not even that pragmatic. They should either conscript everyone or no one. The counter argument for the fighting force being too large with both sexes is just to shorten the service duration.

            To be honest conscripts are a terrible fighting force anyway, South Korea’s large army might look good on paper and when compared to their malnourished Northern neighbours, but it’d get rolled over by a less numerous battle hardened professional military like the UK or Australia.

  • Mighty曹

    Women, especially Kimchi Bitches, definitely should serve .

    • Insomnicide

      They should send all the Kimchi Bitches to the front line.

      • Mighty曹

        Along with all the unemployed lawyers.

    • tina

      what exactly is a kim chi bitch? i never heard my korean friends use that word. do you like korean women?

  • Ralph

    Astonishing! Not only is this sexist against men, who are obligated to give up 2 years of their lives, but also women, who are effectively deemed too delicate to be able to serve their country. I have heard it said before that Korea is at the cutting edge technologically, but firmly stuck in the 70s when it comes to social matters. I think saying the 70s is being generous. What next? Make women have a chaperone when they leave the house?

    • Mateusz82

      Well, sexist against women in the same way that slavery in the US was sexist against white people, by saying that blacks were better able to pick cotton.

      When you force one group, and only one group, to perform labor against their will (especially when that labor includes committing and/or absorbing violence), it’s straight up discrimination.

  • bigmamat

    The wording in the ruling is obviously sexist. Go figure, it’s Korea. However, it makes very good sense that the court would rule in this way. Even if the court found that women should serve, how much money and reorganization would it take for the Korean military to be ready for an influx of mandatory female recruits? Right now I have to assume there are a limited number of women serving voluntarily, how ready would the military be if say 50% of their troops are women? Restructuring the facilities and even the culture would take years to accomplish. I believe the court may have made this ruling based more on the practicality of converting the military more so than on the constitutionality of issue.

    • Paulistano

      Well, I think you don’t know about Muslim World, don’t you? But no, Korea It’s the sexist desgusting country in the world. Entire Asia need some changes when it comes about woman rights especially middle east, East Asia needs too, but at least they are changing in the last years.

      Other than that, I agree you about the court.

      • bigmamat

        There is no culture that isn’t sexist. I really don’t need people to constantly remind me that Korea isn’t the most sexist country in Asia. I get it. I just think it’s amazing that educated people still cannot seem to at least use language that doesn’t make them sound like a bunch of misogynistic assholes. Women get pregnant. Gee, you think? Abuse in the line of command? Really, I heard that goes on in the Korean military all the time now. How could it get worse? Disruption of the power relationship? Seriously. Isn’t that what every Korean is always trying to improve their ability to have domination over someone else? I understand the ruling completely. But the language of the ruling makes your court sound like they all just stepped out of the 19th century.

        • Paulistano

          You don’t need people to constantly remind you that Korea isn’t the most sexist country in Asia but you speak as Korea actually was the most sexist country in the world, WOW. I will copy your comment to prove that: “The wording in the ruling is obviously sexist. Go figure, it’s Korea.”

          And the problem I see here is not Korea, It’s the Army. Usually, Armed Forces are VERY backward institution because change could mean that hierarchy and dicipline would be defied. An Army that has no organization and discipline is doomed to be annihilated in the battlefield. But ack on topic, almost all Armies don’t even accept homosexuals, do you think they would accept woman??? The article for me is not news actually, It’s expected to happen in almost every country out there, all have no doubt that yhe Brazilian Army would do the same, unfortunately.

      • Boris_Da_Bengal_Tiger

        She didn’t say “Korea It’s the sexist desgusting country in the world” she did say that Korea is sexist (or at least the wording in the ruling is).

        So your point about the Muslim World is redudant (especially considering it covers a hell of a lot more land than Korea, inclduing different languages, cultures, etc. It would be like me calling the Americas, Europe and (parts of) Africa the Christian world).

        • Paulistano

          Boris, when I was at high school, I had a subject called “Semântica” or semantics, don’t know if in English have this sub-subject. It’s basic study about interpretation and understanding and what’s the context in the phrase. When she spoke ”The wording in the ruling is obviously sexist. Go figure, it’s Korea”, you primally think that when a person ask you one example of a sexist country you instantly think about a country with a strong stereotyped and a typical country with this attribute. I would answer Yemen or Saudi Arabia, hell woman can’t drive there and nine years old girls are obligated to marry with a guy with 40, how gorgerous and that’s NOT an isolated case there, unfortunately. But hell no it’s not Korea, only poeple with some prejudice against Korea wuld say that.

          You said that I was reudant when I told that Muslim world is sexist. You are right, but by your logic, bigmamat was too. And you can’t compare Christian world with Muslim World. In Christian countries, religion is not something that represents the western people, but ideology and MAINLY nacionalism. But in muslim world, I can tell you that in many countries religion is something that unites them, hell, even Sharia Law is exactly the same in many muslim countries.

          • Boris_Da_Bengal_Tiger

            “hell, even Sharia Law is exactly the same in many muslim countries.” – If you said very similar, I would have agreed. I don’t think you would find the Sharia laws are exactly the same in every country. The Muslim world includes many countries, that are secular, dictatorships, authoriarian, etc. For example modern Turkey is a secular state but still considered part of the Muslim world. It banned the Hijab and until recently, Muslim style clothing were banned. It’s founder actually enfored western style dress on its people. If you said Saudi or Yeman specifically, your point would have stood, even India (which isn’t a Muslim country but has a large number of Muslims) could be counted and I would say they are ‘more’ sexist than Korea (my opinion). But you included a vast range of countries.

            Anyway, Bigmamat’s comment can go towards being meaning that Korea is sexist country. But your gripe was that you thought (Quote: “Well, I think you don’t know about Muslim World, don’t you? But no, Korea It’s the sexist desgusting country in the world.”) it comes out as Korea as the most sexist in the world, which is not the case (again, I’ll say it is my opinon). That was my point really.

            We can agree to disagree.

  • Doge Wallace

    I’m curious to see what Korean feminists say about this.

  • chucky3176

    In North Korea, it is mandatory for women starting at 17 years old, to serve a minimum of 5 years in the military. The North Korean men are require to serve 10 years starting at 17 years old. The North Koreans have kept lowering the minimum height requirements every year due to the North Korean men shrinking in height every year due to severe malnutrition especially during the mid 1990’s when North Korean food crisis was at the worst condition (right at the time when today’s North Korean draftees start to enter the military). The minimum height requirement is now 142cm for the men. Even entering the military does not guarantee that they will be fed well. Each military units must find their own food supplies. They must forage for food, or stashing their own food, or steal from the civilians. The rations are so dire, many North Korean soldiers suck on salt all day to ease the hunger pains. Severe malnutrition makes them lose the smell and taste senses, so they don’t taste the saltiness of the salt. They slowly poison themselves, as salt bloats their organs and their muscles as their face and stomach bloat due to retaining water, making them look fat.

    Compare that to the South Korean military which is like a child’s play.

  • chucky3176

    South Korean military is cutting more than 100,000 men from the military to leave a much smaller footprint, while increasing the pace of hardware upgrades to make up for the manpower losses. Why would they need more soldiers, who are a physically weaker sex?

    • tina

      i didn’t know that, but why not? now if they can decrease the amount of american soldiers, that would be good too.

  • One for all

    “This doesn’t make sense whatsoever. Kimchi bitches don’t even pay taxes for national defense like women in countries such as Germany and Taiwan do, NOR DO THEY HAVE A HIGH FERTILITY RATE. What the hell is going on?”

    Ultimate burn right there!

  • mei mei

    women in military? that’s gonna get so many dramas and scandals

  • BSDetector

    Anyone seriously using the term “Kimchi Bitch” might as well
    just write “herr derr, blah blah, bunga unga” because that’s what you
    sound like, a complete unintelligible idiot.

  • linette lee

    I always question how much difference does it make for a small nation against big nations like USA and China in terms of number of soldiers? You can never compare the number of soldiers with China. They have a lot. Now a day war is won through technology anyway. The nation with the most advance military weapons and highly skilled soldiers are the most powerful. Also I don’t prefer conscription because people who don’t want to be there you will have to trust them to fulfill their duty. Would be nicer if they recruit by giving excellent gov’t benefits for life time and their families. These people who want to join will be professional soldiers,soldiers for life. It’s a career not just a mandatory. In this case in South Korea only two years training on civilians and after that most of them never in real combat. When it’s time to fight are they any good?

    And if it’s mandatory military service I don’t see why women are exempt. All able bodied should take part. Many other nations women are also required to serve. Most women probably don’t have the same physical strength compare to men. It would be difficult for them to perform certain tasks that required physical strength, like you don’t see women as firemen right. Women can perform other tasks and have other duties. The only concern I have is that mandatory military service that would mean people who join are all able bodied young people. Like 20 or 23 years old. Half of your military are young women. In real battles soldiers get injury. Certain injuries are permanent can never be healed and rape is one of them.

    • tina

      I heard that there are female soldiers in china, north korea? is there rape in chinese military against female soldiers? this is a big problem right now in u.s. military.

      • linette lee

        If there is it will 99% go unreported or cover up. In China I meant. If you think the cover up in sexual abuse is bad in USA miltary then China should be 100 times worst.

        • Mateusz82

          Is there any evidence for this, besides “I’m sure there’s tons of rapes going on, because I think it happens.”?

  • chris

    i think countries that have mandatory enlistment follow what Israel is doing. Both females and males. when your country is under serious threat, any able citizen should protect his or her country.

  • BigBoysCry

    From what I know, most of the government officials are men. SO men decided that women are not fit enough to fight for their country. I hope that now Korean men can stop whining and stop blaming Korean because they don’t have to train in the military.

    Also, they’re totally wrong. Women can be good soldiers. They should train like men.

  • FYIADragoon

    If they are not fit to be drafted, then they are not fit for any non-wartime military service (countries can never seem to find enough bodies during an actual war). Women should be completely banned or allowed to be drafted along with the men. Korea also needs to get its shit together on sex crimes.

    • tina

      what’s going on with their sex crimes? are they lax on rape laws?

      • FYIADragoon

        Pretty much, yes.

  • Ryan Kim

    Whenever feminists in america talk about the discrimination of woman, i remind them that tens of millions of men have been forced into military service and millions have died and millions suffered horrible injuries. No american woman has ever been drafted. Now that’s discrimination.

    • tina

      true, and the interesting part is that right now in the u.s. women in the army want to be in the combat, and many u.s. soldiers are not happy about that because they complained women are weaker and will not be able to do certain duties in the combat zone because of the weight of bags, weapons, etc. but women in the u.s. army are fighting for equality, to join men in the combat field.

      • linette lee

        Even when the female soldiers are not actually killing enemies, they are already there in the middle of the battlezones risking their lives. Those women soldiers are in those military bases where they are at high risk of being bombed. They are out there in the red zone working and delivery supplies. They are also armed and must defend themselves. So the female soldiers are saying they are already in the middle of battlefield, so why aren’t they getting the recognition and the title just like their male peers?

        • tina

          they do but it’s much less than their male counterparts. also it’s all double standard in the u.s. military. it’s still mostly male dominated in the army.

    • Mateusz82

      But that’s discrimination against men, that favors women, so it’s totally acceptable, like lack of male reproductive rights, or lack of equal protection under the law.

  • journeyintothewell

    All of this talk of discrimination against males. I’m sure plenty of women, myself included, would gladly do 2 years of service if it meant:

    1) equal pay for equal work

    2) elimination of female sexual objectification in the media

    3) perpetrators of sexual assault and harassment being prosecuted and punished instead of telling women what they should/shouldn’t wear, where they should/shouldn’t go, and what should/shouldn’t say and telling men that they’re special snowflakes who can’t possibly control their sexual feelings

    4) Being valued more for accomplishments and skills than for looks

    5) Not being forced out of employment because of pregnancy and/or marriage

    6) Not having boyfriends and husbands visit prostitutes with coworkers or clients because “the boss said so” or “to get ahead in the company” (this “male-bonding” practice also effectively keeps female workers from advancing in the workforce)

    Those are just six things off the top of my head. 2 years is nothing compared to a lifetime of this. Oh, I should add “not being called a kimchi bitch just because a man doesn’t like what you do/say/look like.”

  • JohnDoe7

    I fully support the basic human right of Korean women to be coerced into the military for 2 years and to be tortured, maimed and killed in any possible war.

  • Maya

    I guess understand where the Judges are coming from. We live in a society where female soldiers lives are more important than male soldiers. In the event of a war sending home 100 body bags filled with male soldiers isn’t as bad as having them filled with female soldiers. And we all know that the media would go ballistic. Plus given the fact that Korea has an increasingly declining birth rate, would they really want to implement a Policy that would encourage women to have kids later?

  • Pingback: "Female Tornado", More Korean Women Employed than Men - koreaBANG()

  • Pingback: Korean Sociological Image #84: What is the REAL reason for the backlash against Korean women? | The Grand Narrative()

Personals @ chinaSMACK - Meet people, make friends, find lovers? Don't be so serious!»