Solving the birthrate crisis.

Birthrate incentives need to focus of returning women to the workforce.

Korea's incredibly low birthrate has been in the news a lot lately and I recently promised a serious post on the subject.  I will try to keep this post 'serious' but I am not sure how deep or authoritative it will be.  It may be serious in tone, but not so much in length.  alright, it is finished and it is a serious length, I would say.

From the Herald:

The government will soon launch a nationwide anti-abortion campaign and aggressively seek more foreigners to come and settle down here as part of efforts to keep the country's population from shrinking, a presidential council said Wednesday.

According to Yonhap News, the move comes as the country again marked one of the lowest birthrates in the world this year.

Let me start with the bad.  I am moderately pro-choice: there are good reasons to have an abortion and there are terrible reasons for having an abortion.  With one exception, I would like to separate this the subject of abortion from birthrate.  That exception is abortion due to the gender of the fetus.  I may return to this point later.

The plans to increase immigration are interesting.  I've been in Korea for a long time, possibly too long, but am not sure how educated I am about the culture (Two humourous links on the subject: asktheexpat, dokdoisours - back to serious-stuff) but this contradicts everything I know about minjok and keeping bloodlines pure.  I like the idea of Korea being more multi-cultural and being more a part of the world than it currently is, but it's clear we aren't thinking about birthrates anymore.

From the Times:

Recognizing the grave nature of this matter, the Presidential Council for Future and Vision proposed Wednesday a package of measures to lift the birthrate and provide support for childcare and education. One of the steps is to offer incentives for families with three or more children which include special interest rates on their mortgages. Third or additional children can also receive bonus scores on college entrance exams and job applications

...

The government has so far announced a series of different measures to promote marriages and childbirth to avert a looming population crisis. But we have to admit that those measures have proven to be unsuccessful at producing tangible results.

The Times also mentions immigration and the seriousness of Korea's low birthrate, but that's not the focus of this post.

The news about mortgages and universities is definitely part of this post.

I can't hold back from saying that it is so weird reading about such a strong government involvement in increasing the birthrate, when in the recent past, having more than one child in China would invite negative government involvement.

Alright, mortgage relief does sound like a good idea and it directly addresses the problem of finding a home big enough for a large family.  Scholarship and financial assistance would also help.  On the other hand, boosting a university entrance exam score and moving a job application higher in it's queue sound terrible.

The Chosun describes two reasons for the low birthrate.  The first is the high cost of raising a child, and the second, related, is the high cost of being a senior citizen:

Advanced countries offer comprehensive welfare benefits. They not only support the cost of raising children, but also guarantee the financial stability of elderly citizens after retirement. But the situation is quite different for the average Korean worker, who faces the constant threat of layoffs, may have already cashed in his pension, and lives in a nation where programs such as annuity insurance to prepare for life after retirement are just budding. Everyone feels pressured to have fewer children so they can save for retirement.

Here is a point that sounds exactly right to me.  I already see myself working until I am grey and bent over, then moving into a grim storage locker for my final days.  I will spend whatever it takes to raise a great child, but fear the cost of a second child.

We've heard enough from the papers; here are my thoughts.

I like the increased immigration plan for a variety of reasons.  It will bring more productive people to Korea and possibly decrease overpopulation elsewhere.  There might be a win-win thing going here and that always feels good.  I hope that immigrants can send some money home and take home some expertise to further assist other countries.  Unfortunately, this would dilute Korean stock and culture - while I don't have much respect for 'pure blood', I don't like the homogenization, the McDonald'sification  of the world.  I guess this is a luxury that we must do without to better care for our seniors.

While I do like the financial aid, I don't think it is fixing the specific limiting reagent involved.  I am a feminist and know that, in my profession, women are at least as capable as I.  Yet, somehow, women must be convinced to give up a year of professional growth, and probably longer.  Indeed, it almost has to be longer; after a year away from work, upon her return, a women might reasonably be less efficient than a man who has not taken time from work.  Presuming this is a traditional family with a wife and husband, it makes better financial sense for the man to keep working and the woman to stay home as long as is best for the child.

I love my son and love most of the time I spend with him but I also enjoy working and my job.  Most women feel the same way, I expect.  If a woman is being asked to have two or three or more children, that is a long time away from the workforce.

All this means women need educational and employment assistance for themselves as much as their children do.

--

Near the top of this post I mentioned abortion and new restrictions.  I can see that a lack of abortion services might raise the birthrate, but I foresee not only more children, but more miserable children.  I felt this way in the post leading up to this one - it described plans to lower the minimum age to enter school.  As a childish adult, I want to see happier children; children who are able to enjoy childhood, more than I want to see more children in general.  The Times touches on this point with "some education experts express concerns that the measure may bring about side effects such as children's difficulty in adapting themselves to school life at a younger age. They point out that education should not be tackled only from the point of economic efficiency."

Summer of loving, fall of segregation

I'm a little late to the story, but it's a story that many of my readers should pay attention to. A judge in Louisiana has refused to many a couple of different races.

The judge, Keith Bardwell, is willing to marry couples of any race so long as they are of the same race.

He might have a rationale for his decision, but it isn't supported by American law. I am not sure if Loving V Virginia acts as a precedent in his state - I thought it would because it went to the supreme court, but am neither American nor a lawyer.

His rationale is that children of mixed-race will have more difficulty in growing up than pure blooded children. This is such a weak argument and I would love to see any evidence for it. Who amongst us is exclusively of one race? How many marriages of single race couples are perfect?

It's upsetting and it is well-covered in the K-blogosphere and beyond. ROK Drop, Dispatches, Pharyngula, CNN.

Perhaps this will bring the hows and why of getting married to the public's consciousness and might even get people to rethink gay marriage. If you have good arguments for allowing mixed race couples to marry, those arguments all apply to gay marriage as well.

---

UPDATED November 4, 2009:

The judge has resigned. His resignation letter contained one sentence and did not detail why.

News article here.

Fall runs

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce in Korea has chosen not to organize the Terry Fox Run again this year. I can sympathize; to meet Canadian liability requirements would be a challenge for a small organization overseas.

So I'm happy to see that the Hi-Seoul marathon, which does include an actual marathon, also has shorter runs - a half marathon and a 10km run. Here is the site.

I am not sure if Oct 11 is a good date for me as I hope to get to Seoul for the KOTESOL conference two weeks later, but I will try. I will also watch for local runs.

The summer of loving

"We can finally trade "I do"s 

With whoever we may choose."

Roy Zimmerman

42 years ago the court case Loving v. Virginia decided that Americans could marry who they chose, regardless of race. 47 days later I was born.  Somewhat more than eight years ago, I married a wonderful woman who happened to be Korean.  Although not American, I am sure that court decision helped pave the way for the way I feel accepted today.

Lovings in ABC News.

Far outside the normal bounds of this blog, a group of people, in the U.S. and elsewhere, are fighting for the right to get married now.  I think they should get it.

via Pharyngula

Racism in active and passive forms, and hope

This post is about racism and will touch on Obama's inauguration. I can't say that it is an "important post, per se, but please don't dismiss it as yet another "I love Obama" post". There may be other, excellent reasons, to dismiss this post, but that isn't one of them

I am not a politcal blogger, not even for my homeland, Canada, nor my current home, Korea, but the American presidential inauguration has me fascinated. Me, and every other blogger.

On January 10, CBC's Quirks and Quarks, an hour long radio science show that I am addicted to and have even written to the host, included a segment on racism that made me uncomfortable. It described a psychology experiment that exposed racism where none was expected.
The experiment ran like this: The subject, presumably after filling out consent forms, entered what she or he thought was a waiting room with two other subjects. The subjects were actually part of the test, were ringers; one was white and the other black. The black person stood up, made a remark about forgetting a book and left the room, bumping the other ringer. After the black man left, the ringer performed one of three actions. He either said nothing, said something moderately racist or very racist. I forget what the middle option was, but the third option was something like, "Clumsy niggers!"

Soon after that, the subject was interviewed about tension and, well, I forget exactly what, but current emotional state and the like. An incredibly low number of subjects mentioned the racist event or claimed to be upset after the event. I suspect few or none actually challenged the man making the comments, but I don't know.

From Q & Q:

Dr. Kawakami, an Associate Professor of Psychology at York University, studies the psychology of racism and she has revealed a disheartening finding: despite the fact we tend to predict we'll feel bad witnessing a racist act, we in fact tend to feel indifferent. What's more, Dr. Kawakami found that when asked to chose between a white person who uttered a racist comment or the black person to whom the comment was directed (in order to work on a problem-solving task) subjects tended to choose the racist white person over the innocent black person. Dr. Kawakami says her study reveals people's deep emotional biases -- specifically towards blacks -- despite their stated belief that they are not racist.

Dr Kawakami on Science Mag.

Far more uplifting, is the concept of people being cultural bridges or xenophiles, as discussed on Spark, another CBC radio show and podcast.

"The Internet Age should be a golden age for bridge figures and for xenophiles."

That's what Ethan Zuckerman, a fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society wrote in his blog post, Bridgeblogger and Xenophile, a tale of two bloggers. But just what is a xenophile, according to Ethan?

It’s been a challenge for me to define xenophiles as a category without falling victim to definitions that are trivial or superficial. It’s easy to dismiss the idea by suggesting that everyone who eats sushi and listens to world music is - or considers herself to be - a xenophile. Too loose a definition and “xenophile” ends up sounding like a synonym for “liberal”, “multicultural or even “politically correct”, which isn’t what I’m intending.

Xenophilia is about connecting with people, not with cultural artifacts or other things. Liking Japanese food or Senegalese hiphop doesn’t make you a xenophile - xenophilia is about making connections across language and cultural barriers motivated by your interest in making better sushi or translating Daara J lyrics. Xenophilia is broader than the love for a specific culture or an aspect of that culture - it’s a broader fascination with the complexity and diversity of the world. Xenophilia changes your behavior, especially your behavior in seeking for information, leading you to pay attention not just to the parts of the world that have caught your attention, but to others that you know little about.

I think I can be a bridge between cultures, which I define as less than a xenophile but more, or more nuanced, than a cheerleader. I enjoy and admire a great deal of Korean culture and admire many Korean people. I am impressed with Korea's growth after 1953 and by the friendliness of the people I meet all the time, but I am not about to rename this blog, "50 reasons why Dokdo is Korean". So, I am not a cheerleader. On the other hand, after ten years, I don't speak nearly as much Korean as I should. My job of explaining English and the typical culture of English speaking countries, particularly Canada, is almost the definition of a bridge.

I think my wife, who is so much better a person than I in so many ways, is a xenophile, while remaining firmly grounded in her home culture.

Another remarkable person I know and work with has the initials NA and is a Canadian of Somali ethnicity, who speaks, I don't know, five, six languages. She is definitely a xenophile, comfortable in any country she visits.

Recently Pharyngula linked to Martin Luther King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail, which I read and was amazed by. Here are a few long excerpts:

One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: "Why didn't you give the new city administration time to act?" The only answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will act....But he [the mayor] will not see this without pressure from devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied."

We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait."
...
How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust....

Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal. Let me give another explanation. A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law.
...
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country's antireligious laws.
...
...Was not Martin Luther an extremist: "Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God." And John Bunyan: "I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience." And Abraham Lincoln: "This nation cannot survive half slave and half free." And Thomas Jefferson: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal . . ." ...

I now love the sentence, "Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God" but I don't think I am capable of it. I am not describing strength so much as mindfulness. In the Q & Q study, the test subjects appeared to not care enough to get involved. I do not necessarily wish to be confronted but I would like to know the result of such a test.

Hmm, I don't think I have much to say about the inauguration after all. I only hope the American people face the test with courage and that the result is positive.

Enforce Research Ethnics!

I try to not comment on every English error I find, but sometimes I just have to share (and need to post about something). This photo is from the Korea Times (Mar 5, 2008) and they corrected the online version.

I remember a few years ago when everyone was chuckling over George Bush's "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, ..., ..., won't be fooled again" remark. Someone commented at the time that Bush probably couldn't imagine feeling shame himself so got confused with the proverb. I imagine, with plagiarism rampant, that Koreans may have similar trouble thinking about ethics. Or maybe, they are trying to blame Warda, the Egyptian researcher who collaborated with Han Jin (more in the former link above).

Dae Han Brit People

The Korea Times has an article on DNA tests on human bones believed to date back to the Bronze Age reveal similarity with contemporary British sources.

The results are 'very, very rudimentary' and need to be cross-checked before conclusions can be drawn.

The edition of the Korea Times that carried this article also carries news that Dr Hwang is making a quiet comeback. He might just be the perfect person to carry out the cross checking above. Now all Koreans have to do is decide which result they would prefer and Dr Hwang will find it.

I'm not sure of the proper segue for this, but I can see at least a tenuous connection to the recent outcry in Korea with racism on TV. If there were Caucasians here in the Bronze Age, Koreans are a little more heterogeneous than previously thought.

Incidentally, I expect the results are in error- either the similarity in the DNA or the age of the bones.
On the subject of racism on TV, the Metropolitician has an important post that is worth reading - and more.