korea! the dirty dirtay~ - Page 11

On April 28 2010 07:41 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I think gender problems are a pretty sensitive issue everywhere. However people wanna interpret the lifestyle OP described is fine. One thing I don't like though is when people try to justify themselves. To say no one is "forcing" you to do anything is a very dumb argument. On the other hand to criticize a certain culture on the basis of higher values, for example gender equality, is probably just as stupid. I can't see any reasons to take pride in being a part of a sociological phenomenon generated by wage disparity, patriarchal values, conservative values and who knows what. You wanna get laid, there's no need to prepare a good conscience so you don't feel guilty afterward, at least that's how I thought about it. To use a bunch of bullshit reasons to justify your fulfilling of pleasures at the expense of others is pathetic. It's similar to people who feel bad for animals but can't stop eating meat, so they come up with reasons like oh I'm only gonna buy meat from places that treat their animals well. If we need morally pleasant reasoning to justify all of our actions then we might as well not act at all.

I don't know about booking clubs in Korea but in China there are definitely problems that violate some human rights sensibilities. The stuff about gender inequality are probably not as relevant. Every case is different though and I trust everyone to make decisions that sit well with their own set of values.

On April 28 2010 06:41 Shauni wrote:
The sluts doesn't know what's best for them!

As someone mentioned earlier, it's not that uncommon for loan sharks to have agreements with different forms of prostitution to make the (as KudoJoe phrased it) 'stupid' girls who fall into the trap sex slaves. But whether or not the girls are being forced into this - consciously or unconsciously - is not the main issue here. Jibba already summed it up pretty well. The USA mind is for more individual responsibility where you take the consequences of your actions even if the society is not 'fair'. You have your social ladders and do everything in your power to climb - within the law.
The reason why Foucault is upset is because the government here (unlike USA for example) consciously tries to protect people from these sorts of things; sexism, prostitution, gender unequality, judging people by physical appearance unconsciously, beauty fixation - almost everything described in this thread.
The morals he grew up with and learned in school is a direct contradiction to everything in this thread. I'm not saying any method is superior, it's just that by arguing over the internet you need to realize that the morals are NOT universal, they change a lot from country to country - the cultural differences. It's something you always have to consider before mounting your horse to look down on other people with 'lesser' morals.

The will of South Korea as a whole obviously doesn't want to change this behaviour, as someone said earlier the whole thing is deeply rooted in the culture and people have a different view on using your body to your advantage (socially or economically), be it flirting, getting into clubs or even sex. The OP is definitely right in that it's not up to us to be condescending. If he wants to take advantage over how the society works then that's fine. Although I sense a slight glorification of the night life in Korea even though it's not as bad as in Rekrul's posts.

And I don't understand lilsusies posts at all. Taking pride in your country is fine, but concealing every 'problem' in the South Korean society (especially to the outside world) is one of the reasons why nothing ever changes... If there's is no attention, how are people going to consider these things more consciously? Isn't it very hypocritical saying you take pride in your country and still try to ignore certain aspects of the society?
It reminds me of a South Korean movie I've seen Nabbeun namja/Bad Guy which is about the prostitution and gender roles. The movie was very provocative to the South Korean audience and it received attention in the press because the male actor was sexy and famous with some korean drama show meanwhile. The interesting thing is that even though the director put no moral values whatsoever in the movie, the audience interpreted it as trying to make South Korea look 'bad' in the eyes of the world. Sufficient to say the movie wasn't very highly praised in media...

And you also have to consider - why exactly is the prostitution, buying everything with money and plastics/superficial beauty fixation a minor taboo here? Why is it a 'hush hush' subject and who profits from the corruption and concealing?

On April 28 2010 07:43 tonight wrote:


God damn I love that "If we need morally pleasant reasoning to justify all of our actions then we might as well not act at all. " line. That's a good fucking line there.

On April 28 2010 08:40 Shauni wrote:
StorkHwaiting: I believe you misinterpreted everything. Reread his post again please. The morally pleasant reasoning is used by people to justify their morally unjust (by their own interpretation) actions to get rid of the guilt and conscience. And he doesn't like it.

On April 28 2010 09:04 zulu_nation8 wrote:
no you have your point but there's nothing wrong with being a base instinctual animal.

On April 28 2010 08:14 StorkHwaiting wrote:


Uh, actually I think that line is kind of bad... The entire point of morals is to help people stay true to principles they believe in. If you're consistently doing things without an ideal or goal in mind, then you're just a base animal living off of instinct or self-gratification.

In essence, if you don't have morally pleasant reasoning to justify an action, that implies you have morally UNpleasant reasoning. AKA, you're doing something unethical solely for the sake of self-benefit. In other words, selfish, ruthless, and mercenary behavior. There's a reason that's frowned upon. Zulu's line might sound cool in a tough guy, macho kind of way, but all it really says is people shouldn't care about doing the right thing and if we always did the right thing, then we'd end up doing nothing. A notion which I think is utter bollocks.

P.S. no disrespect to zulu. I just disagree with him on this point

On April 28 2010 07:41 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I think gender problems are a pretty sensitive issue everywhere. However people wanna interpret the lifestyle OP described is fine. One thing I don't like though is when people try to justify themselves. To say no one is "forcing" you to do anything is a very dumb argument. On the other hand to criticize a certain culture on the basis of higher values, for example gender equality, is probably just as stupid. I can't see any reasons to take pride in being a part of a sociological phenomenon generated by wage disparity, patriarchal values, conservative values and who knows what. You wanna get laid, there's no need to prepare a good conscience so you don't feel guilty afterward. To use a bunch of bullshit reasons to justify your fulfilling of pleasures at the expense of others is pathetic. It's similar to people who feel bad for animals but can't stop eating meat, so they come up with reasons like oh I'm only gonna buy meat from places that treat their animals well. If we need morally pleasant reasoning to justify all of our actions then we might as well not act at all.

I don't know about booking clubs in Korea but in China there are definitely problems that violate some human rights sensibilities. The stuff about gender inequality are probably not as relevant. Every case is different though and I trust everyone to make decisions that sit well with their own set of values.

On April 28 2010 09:24 tonight wrote:

Morals don't come into play with every decision a person makes. It's not all clear cut and it's not black and white. Just because you're not letting your moral compass guide you at all times doesn't mean you're living some morally unjust life. That's just plain silly. It also has nothing to do with being tough at all. It's more along the lines of people abusing other's morals to push theirs on others. Like some over the top hippy vegans. Yeah, it sounds morally good, but there are many down sides to living that life style.

On April 28 2010 11:54 tonight wrote:
Well, the point I was making was completely general. You on the other hand want to start a debate which I do not. Also, what I said about the vegans was an analogy and nothing more. Don't nit-pick where it doesn't need to be nit-picked.

Good day.

On April 28 2010 12:45 zulu_nation8 wrote:
Socrates not Aristotle said "the unexamined life is not worth living" in the Apology. Socrates had very ill-conceived notions of what values are. I wouldn't listen to anything he says.