Gay rights in DPRK - interesting stance

[punisa]

Was just browsing the Wiki and found a very interesting article. DPRK might have its flaws, but this bit is by far the most progressive official government stance on LGBT community I have ever seen.
Again, I say "official government stance", I have virtually no idea what is being done in practice.

Maybe some of you who are more knowledgeable on the LGBT laws around a world can clarify me. But does any country openly admits that homosexual people are genetically born just as us heterosexuals and thus are no different in any way?

The official government statement is as follows: "Due to tradition in Korean culture, it is not customary for individuals of any sexual orientation to engage in public displays of affection. As a country that has embraced science and rationalism, the DPRK recognizes that many individuals are born with homosexuality as a genetic trait and treats them with due respect.

Homosexuals in the DPRK have never been subject to repression, as in many capitalist regimes around the world. However, North Koreans also place a lot of emphasis on social harmony and morals. Therefore, the DPRK rejects many characteristics of the popular gay culture in the West, which many perceive to embrace consumerism, classism and promiscuity."

[the last donut of the night]

Was just browsing the Wiki and found a very interesting article. DPRK might have its flaws, but this bit is by far the most progressive official government stance on LGBT community I have ever seen.

:rolleyes:


Again, I say "official government stance", I have virtually no idea what is being done in practice.

Well, the government stance isn't that great either.


"Due to tradition in Korean culture, it is not customary for individuals of any sexual orientation to engage in public displays of affection. As a country that has embraced science and rationalism, the DPRK recognizes that many individuals are born with homosexuality as a genetic trait and treats them with due respect.

Homosexuals in the DPRK have never been subject to repression, as in many capitalist regimes around the world. However, North Koreans also place a lot of emphasis on social harmony and morals. Therefore, the DPRK rejects many characteristics of the popular gay culture in the West, which many perceive to embrace consumerism, classism and promiscuity."

1) The fact that any public displays of affection are seen as wrong is not very good.

2) The popular gay culture in the West may be "classist, promiscuous, or consumerist" because that's how a very oppressed community found a way to escape from the reactionary bullshit around them. Also, many gays are not classist, promiscuous, or consumerist. That's usually a homophobic stereotype. This idea is based on the premise that all gays in the West are rich, white liberal snobs who go down to New York to buy designer clothes.

There are black, latino, asian and gays of every minority. There are working-class gays. There are anti-consumerist gays. And there are non-promiscuous gays (whatever that means, because kissing a man in public is more promiscuous for me than kissing a woman).

The DPRK is a state-capitalist regime, which prides itself in worshipping a dead Stalinist president. It is not progressive. It is backwards. It should be a disgrace in every leftist's eyes.

[manic expression]

Neat to see that info, just goes to show the achievements of the Korean people in the DPRK.


1) The fact that any public displays of affection are seen as wrong is not very goodPublic displays of affection aren't seen as "wrong" like they're evil or anything, it's just not what people do in Korean culture. That's less of a political statement than a cultural one, and your conflation of the two is insensitive at best.


2) The popular gay culture in the West may be "classist, promiscuous, or consumerist" because that's how a very oppressed community found a way to escape from the reactionary bullshit around them. Also, many gays are not classist, promiscuous, or consumerist. That's usually a homophobic stereotype. This idea is based on the premise that all gays in the West are rich, white liberal snobs who go down to New York to buy designer clothes.The government didn't blame homosexuals for reacting to oppression the way they have, they simply noted how gay communities in capitalist societies differ from the culture in socialist societies. And the government did NOT say that all LGBTs are "classist, promiscuous or consumerist", it specifically said that "popular gay culture" at large in capitalist countries glorifies certain aspects over others, which is a valid point.

Don't try to stretch the DPRK's position out of context. You're ascribing values and motivations (and words) to the DPRK that simply have no basis here. What you're doing would be like watching an episode of the Boondocks that criticizes some aspects of Black culture in America and saying "the Boondocks is saying that most Black people are stupid and lazy!" It's just not like that.


There are black, latino, asian and gays of every minority. There are working-class gays. There are anti-consumerist gays. And there are non-promiscuous gays (whatever that means, because kissing a man in public is more promiscuous for me than kissing a woman).And none of that contradicts what the DPRK was saying, which was not directed towards LGBT individuals AT ALL. Once again, your perspective is hopelessly warped because you desperately want to convince yourself of the following:


The DPRK is a state-capitalist regime, which prides itself in worshipping a dead Stalinist president. It is not progressive. It is backwards. It should be a disgrace in every leftist's eyes.I knew it was coming sooner or later, the self-satisfied socialist-bashing we're all too familiar with. Sorry, but this kind of drivel isn't worth a response, in no small part because it would distract us from how mistaken you are on the important points above.

[scarletghoul]

I generally agree with North Korea. manic expression's post is glorious and correct.

[Demogorgon]

For heaven's sake, how can that possibly be seen as the "most progressive in the world"? The majority of Governments these days recognise homosexuality is simply something you are born with.

Also, according to those who have left North Korea (I know, I know, apologists will claim they have no credibility and only Government propaganda sources are to be believed), the issue is in fact simply not discussed, many didn't even realise homosexuality exists until they reached South Korea or China or wherever.

[BobKKKindle$]

As far as I know, the family exists in North Korea. It is not possible for either women or homosexuals to be emancipated if the family still exists given that the material roots of homophobia lie in the fact that the identity and behaviour of homosexuals does not conform to the widespread perception that the family is the only legitimate or natural way of organizing society and the raising of children, a perception that is supported both by deliberate argumentation on the part of states and other bodies, as well as the simple fact that the vast majority of people are brought up within the confines of a patriarchial family and hence are liable to believe that it is natural unless they are convinced otherwise, or later have experiences of living outside the family for long periods of time. The abolition of homophobia can only come about as a result of the abolition of the family, which can in turn only come about as a result of the overthrow of capitalism, given how dependent the bourgeoisie is on the family, which explains why we always hear governments complaning about the growing numbers of single-parent families and umarried parents etc. It may be the case that North Korea's laws are not shockingly reactionary but as Dem. points out in this respect they are not that different from most other countries around the world where homosexuality has also been legalized and it does not say much about the existence of homophobic attitudes which are bound up with the existence of the family.

[Spawn of Stalin]

Although gay rights are not the be all and end all of liberty in socialist states, they are certainly important, I've read something similar to this regarding gay rights in the DPRK, and there is no two ways about it, they certainly do have one of the most progressive stances on sexuality in modern history. Long live the totalitarian Stalinist state.

:rolleyes:

[Walt]

Also, according to those who have left North Korea (I know, I know, apologists will claim they have no credibility and only Government propaganda sources are to be believed), the issue is in fact simply not discussed, many didn't even realise homosexuality exists until they reached South Korea or China or wherever.
Look, most North Koreans who defect are farmers on the country side that are starving due to droughts, or "prison camp" refugees. I doubt anyone would even mention homosexuality in this region- and even in Pyongyang, I doubt it is almost in existence, but that doesn't change the government's stance.

[The Feral Underclass]

As a country that has embraced science and rationalism, the DPRK recognizes that many individuals are born with homosexuality as a genetic trait

What science is that? How have they come to recognise it as a "genetic trait"? There is no conclusive evidence that confirms that...

[Demogorgon]

Look, most North Koreans who defect are farmers on the country side that are starving due to droughts, or "prison camp" refugees. I doubt anyone would even mention homosexuality in this region- and even in Pyongyang, I doubt it is almost in existence, but that doesn't change the government's stance.
What? :lol:

Homosexuality exists everywhere at the same rate wherever you go. To say that they don't know about it because it isn't there is absolutely absurd.

[Walt]

What? :lol:

Homosexuality exists everywhere at the same rate wherever you go. To say that they don't know about it because it isn't there is absolutely absurd.
The country sides villages in the DPRK are very much isolated and only cater to one or two families. Due to droughts, famine, etc, these people are the ones who usually defect. With that said, it's only logical that the chance of a defector knowing about homosexuality is low.

Also, I'd love a reference for your post:

Also, according to those who have left North Korea (I know, I know, apologists will claim they have no credibility and only Government propaganda sources are to be believed), the issue is in fact simply not discussed, many didn't even realise homosexuality exists until they reached South Korea or China or wherever.

Thanks.

[BobKKKindle$]

What science is that? How have they come to recognise it as a "genetic trait"? There is no conclusive evidence that confirms that...

More importantly, the government's stance seems to infer that if it could somehow be proved that homosexuality was a choice then it would be acceptable to condemn it and punish those who are caught having sex with someone of the same gender - surely the stance of socialists should be that whether it is a matter of choice or genetics is in fact completely irrelevant because neither the state nor the community has any right to condemn part of someone's identity or tell two consenting individuals what they should and should not be allowed to do, in terms of sexual interaction.

[Led Zeppelin]

Was just browsing the Wiki and found a very interesting article. DPRK might have its flaws, but this bit is by far the most progressive official government stance on LGBT community I have ever seen.
Again, I say "official government stance", I have virtually no idea what is being done in practice.

I don't see how this is any more progressive than the stance of the Dutch, French, Finnish, Danish, Belgian etc. governments?

[BobKKKindle$]

I don't see how this is any more progressive than the stance of the Dutch, French, Finnish, Danish, Belgian etc. governments?

It's because those backwards Asians are generally reactionary in contrast to the glory of the European Enlightenment, so when they do poke their noses into modernity, we have to applaud them for it.

[Holden Caulfield]

Trotkyists. Or perhaps they're all the same old capitalist state


Confusing Trots with Cliffites there

[Led Zeppelin]

I'm sure these "enlightened" European imperialist governments are more progressive than DPRK according to Trotkyists. Or perhaps they're all the same old capitalist state.:rolleyes:

Can you read?

I asked how the stance of the DPRK on homosexuality is more progressive than the stances of the other states I mentioned.

If you can answer it then do so. If you can't, then don't troll and leave your defense of the socialist utopia elsewhere where it may be desired.

[BobKKKindle$]

Are you saying that since the western imperialists have already produced progressive legislation, DPRK should not? If not, what exactly are you saying?I can't speak for LZ, but the fact that this legislation has been implemented in many other countries around the world indicates that allowing two people of the same gender to have sex with each other should not be taken of evidence of a country being socialist or having a great stance on gay rights, especially when that country has not yet succeeded in abolishing the patriarchal family - which is a central feature of all class societies (capitalism in particular, because the family allows for the daily renewal of the labour force at no cost to the bourgeoisie, and is also useful for the bourgeoisie in terms of selling commodities, because if communities were not divided into families then it would not be necessary to buy commodities such as household appliances and food items in such large quantities, as these goods would be shared by the entire community, a much more rational way of doing things if you think about it) and the basis of the oppression of both women and homosexuals. The fact that people are so eager to draw attention to the DPRK not banning homosexuality suggests that they expect non-western countries to be reactionary when it comes to these issues, which is obviously a rather chauvinist assertion.


One might as well ask how certain unique features of socialist countries like universal healthcare in Cuba are more progressive since many imperialist countries have implemented the same.The fact that universal healthcare exists in other countries besides Cuba indicates that universal healthcare, whilst being an important gain and something the working class should defend, has nothing to do with socialism as such, and so is compatible with capitalism. In this sense it is similar to other demands that have been obtained under capitalism such as the eight-hour day, the right of workers to unionize, as well as other rights that are not directly connected to the workplace, such as a woman's right to abortion. What distinguishes socialism from capitalism is the abolition of commodity production and workers having democratic control of the means of production, neither of which exist in Cuba, or any of the other countries that you regard as socialist, including North Korea, and China, as in all of these countries workers sell their labour power as a commodity to the state, which functions as the equivalent of the bourgeoisie, and do not have control over how their workplaces are organized, or how investment resources are allocated, and certainly do not the right to criticize the state or the prevailing economic system without being subject to repression.


they may not be ideal workers' states, but they are moving towards socialismI take it that you believe the working class is the ruling class in these societies. When exactly did workers seize control of the means of production and establish institutions of working-class rule, i.e. raise themselves to the position of the ruling class, in your opinion?

[BobKKKindle$]

I don't believe thatSo if you don't think North Korea is a state under the rule of the working class, and if you also think that "Cuba and North Korea are not bourgeois states", that is, states that protect the wealth and power of a minority, then, given that the Marxist theory of the state holds that all states are instruments of class oppression, used to further and protect the interests of a particular class, and incapable of being used to pursue the interests of society as a whole due to the irreconcilable nature of class antagonisms, in your view, which class is the ruling class in North Korea?

In the same vein, what is the mode of production in North Korea and Cuba? What it is about these states (apart from you saying they are "progressive" which is too vague) that makes them non-capitalist?

It seems a bit strange to accuse any moderator of being liberal when you seem to hold to what can justifiably be described as a liberal view of the state.

[Led Zeppelin]

Are you saying that since the western imperialists have already produced progressive legislation, DPRK should not?


What Bob said, but it's not surprising that someone like you would take such huge leaps in logic and reading comprehension to say something that's got nothing to do with the matter at hand.

If anyone is degeneration discussions it's you and your "debating tactics".

[punisa]

As one would suspect, opinions would be divided.
So why did I call the N.Korean recognition of Gay people the most advanced in the world?
It's very simple really - because it IS a totalitarian state !

The official statement of DPRK government weights much more then the so called "modern European views". DPRK is a totalitarian state and such states do as they please. The "Great Leader" Kim could've easily made the law that all Gay people must be catapulted into the orbit, or that all people under 21 must walk on their feet.
Instead they made a progresive stance that is made solely upon the idea that it is the right thing to do. A humanistic and socialist value.

How is this different from capitalist West? Completely different !
Just go ask Mr. Obama. - is he really that gay friendly kinda of guy? Yeah, my ass.
His camp figured the statistics - millions of American citizens are Gay and Bisexuals - big horde of voters.
Same thing goes on in Europe.
The whole "respect the differences" under capitalism is bollocks ! Just a sharade that (again) benefits the small ruling minority.
Don't want to go into details, but I'm very sure that a complex economic formula will eventually show that more profits will be made with sexual diversifed nation then with a sexually oppresed one.
Yes, no matter how odd it sounds from time to time, but virtually everything that changes in our capitalist systems is always directed towards a single goal - profit.

That is the great sexual revolution in the west - sharade. Besides, laws in capitalism serve only the leaders. Every liberal European gay-friendly country always has equally fascist organizations which beat up, oppres and even kill gay people simply because they are gay.

Again, I point out that the paragraph from DPRK goverment statement is simply that - a goverment statement.
But, if it would go a step further, say - to openly allow gay marriages. I doubt that any gay couple in Pyongyang would be physicaly or verbaly attacked for being gay.
Why? Cause you would be breaking the law, and breaking the law in DPRK is like spitting into a face of the "dear leader".

Just to make clear, I'm not a totalitarian supporter. But in this small aspect, I still stand by my first argument - the specificity of the ruling goverment in DPRK makes their official LGBT policies most advanced in the world.

Then again, this could mean shit when it comes to practice. But none of us really knows nothing when it comes to DPRK practices in real life. So all we can do is speculate.
(if you've just came back from a month long vaccation in N.Korea, then please come out and set this debate straight)
Anti DPRK propaganda, which is massive, can not provide any answers to our questions.

[BobKKKindle$]

Why don't you tell me? Do you think the bureaucracy have formed a new ruling class? I thought only workers or capitalists can be the ruling class.It's obviously not the case that only workers or capitalists can be the ruling class because there are have been a range of class societies (i.e. modes of production) throughout history in which no capitalists or workers even existed, let alone occupied the position of the ruling class - under feudal society it was the landowners who were the ruling class with the same being true of slave owners in societies based on slave ownership, such as ancient Greece and Rome. However I do regard North Korea as a state-capitalist society, and you are obviously inferring that North Korea cannot be capitalist or have a bourgeoisie because capitalism relies on private property being owned by a bourgeoisie comprised of many individual owners, and in North Korea the economy is owned and run by the state.

I object to this definition of capitalism because what defines capitalism as a mode of production is not a particular legal superstructure (namely a legal superstructure that acknowledges private property and therefore allows any given individual to set up their own business and keep all of their profits without interference from the state, which is something people are obviously not allowed to do in North Korea, with the limited exception of the jointly-owned enterprises that have been set up recently in Chongjin and a number of other locations that the government has designated SEZs since the collapse of the Soviet Union, in which most of the enterprises are owned by North Korea in conjunction with the ROK and/or the PRC - how do you reconcile these SEZs with your claim that North Korea does not permit capitalism, given that, at this (http://www.korea-dpr.com/business.htm) page of its website, the North Korean government boasts that it has the lowest wage rates and some of the most flexible working conditions in the whole of Asia?) but rather the working population being deprived of the products of their labour, and control of the means of production, with the result being that the conditions and pay of workers are subject to the control of an entity whose interests are oppossed to their own - what Marx described as wage-labour. It is this absence of democratic control that allows us to speak of there being wage-labour in North Korea, and hence of North Korea being a capitalist country. There is a bourgeoisie in North Korea in the form of a bureaucracy because it logically follows from the above that a bourgeoisie does not need to assume the "classical" form of private entrepreneurs but can instead take the form of an institution, i.e. the state, in the same way that the landowning elite in feudal societies partly took the form of the Catholic Church and other religious orders, as well as individual barons and dukes.

So, I'll ask you again, who/what is the ruling class in North Korea?

[Led Zeppelin]

LZ's "debating" tactic: personally attack the other guy.

Let's see here:

I ask the OP why he said the stance on homosexuality of the DPRK was more advanced than the stances of some other states.

Socialist attacks me and Trotskyists in general as supporters of western Imperialism.

I wonder how the hell he could draw that idiotic conclusion from the question I asked.

Socialist further attacks me and infers some more idiotic crap from my response which to any other sane human being isn't inferable.

I call Socialist a troll based on his substitution of debating tactics with pure trolling.

And the above quote is his latest response.

Enough said.

[Dimentio]

While I do not question DPRK's credentials on this issue, I wonder if the people in general really have an institutionalised way to express any feelings or sexual lust for individuals of the same gender as themselves given the extremely rigid structure of contemporary North Korean society.

[Shin Honyong]

Sexual freedom in DPRK is generally restricted legally due to the hyper-Confucian philosophy of the government. I really wouldn't pay attention to such statements since the DPRK is notorious for making nice progressive statements and then doing the exact opposite when it comes to gender issues. Women in the DPRK are still looked upon as mothers and wives first and foremost still.

[ls]

I doubt anyone would even mention homosexuality in this region- and even in Pyongyang, I doubt it is almost in existence, but that doesn't change the government's stance.

Is this some kind of sick joke?

[Walt]

Is this some kind of sick joke?
The fuck are you talking about?

[Dimentio]

Bourgeois states cannot metaphysically change into workers states overnight. I'd argue that DPRK, along with Cuba, is midway in its transformation towards a workers' state. I don't have an absolutist view of history where it has to be either a fully functional idealist workers' state or else its a "capitalist" state. If you have such a fake standard towards socialism, it just tells the working class that socialism always remains some sort of a magical ideal far away in the future where everything is rosy and people start farting rainbows, but most importantly, an ideal that can never be achieved. This is what separates debating societies from actual revolutionaries who achieve real success and win victories for the working class.

Well, since DPRK is practically feudal anyway, you could very well argue they are on the mid-way to socialism. When they transformed themselves into a capitalist sweatshop, they would have gone two thirds of the way. ^^

[Tatarin]

It is allowed? I thought it was something everyone had an unquestionable right to do?

[ls]

The fuck are you talking about?

You are denying that homosexuality exists in Pyongyang and in the countryside, which is simply absurd.


and even in Pyongyang, I doubt it is almost in existence, but that doesn't change the government's stance.

Do you want to even try and back that up? I don't think so. :rolleyes:

[gorillafuck]

Well, since DPRK is practically feudal anyway
What?

[Walt]

You are denying that homosexuality exists in Pyongyang and in the countryside, which is simply absurd.



Do you want to even try and back that up? I don't think so. :rolleyes:
Sadly you don't understand fully, so I will have to elaborate. First I'd like to add (I think someone already posted about it), Confucianism is a heavy influence on many Asians, including the Koreans. Not to mention the other heavy influence of Juche- that said you'd obviously notice a lack of homosexuality in individuals, and even for South Koreans, you barely see it.
And finally, I doubt it's almost in existence, which I mean it still could exist, but only in real small numbers.

[BobKKKindle$]

I'd argue that DPRK, along with Cuba, is midway in its transformation towards a workers' state. I don't have an absolutist view of history where it has to be either a fully functional idealist workers' state or else its a "capitalist" state.I'm open to the possibility of a workers state suffering from various symptoms of bureaucratic degeneration but this doesn't change the fact that it's a workers state, i.e. a state that exists in a society where the working class is the ruling class, and it certainly doesn't make it a state that's in the middle of a transition from bourgeois rule to the rule of the working class, which strikes me as a strange thing to say because it implies that there are periods when the state does not serve the interests of a particular class but serves the interests of multiple classes or even the interests of society as a whole, and therefore conflicts with the core of Marx's theory of the state, which holds that all states have a class character. I would argue that during the period 1920-1928, Soviet Russia was a degenerated workers state, and only became a state-capitalist regime in 1928 because the start of the First Five-Year Plan in that year marked the beginning of forced accumulation, i.e. the process by which the bureaucracy carried out the historic role of the bourgeoisie, by subordinating the rights and interests of the working population to the rapid development of the forces of production. It is this observation that forms the basis of Cliff's theory of deflected permanent revolution, according to which, in countries where the working class lacks a revolutionary leadership, and the bourgeoisie is also too weak to carry out its historic tasks (which is what Trotsky predicted would be the case in all countries that have entered the capitalist stage of development at a comparatively late stage in history as the bourgeois classes of these countries are frequently bound to the remnants of feudalism or the interests of imperialist powers and hence cannot carry out the role that Marx assigned to the bourgeoisie in the most developed countries) it is sometimes possible for a section of the intelligentsia or state bureaucracy to partially carry out the tasks of the bourgeoisie, especially economic development. By using this theory we can identify that governments like the PRC are/were basically the same as other governments that do not describe themselves as socialist or communist but also came to power during the post-war era with the objective of freeing themselves from the economic impacts of imperialism, with varying degrees of success, such as Nasser's regime in Egypt.

So, let me ask you again, is there a ruling class in North Korea, and, if so, what is it?


Well, since DPRK is practically feudal anywayNo, it is not. The industrial sector accounts for 43% of the North Korean economy (source (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/kn.html)) and even in the countryside, which is what you presumably have in mind when you assert that North Korea is feudal without a single bit of evidence, the dominant relation of production is wage-labour, because workers who are employed by state-owned collective farms and other rural enterprises receive a wage for their labour, whereas, under feudalism, peasants hand over part of their produce to the local lord or whoever the local representative of the ruling class happens to be (it could be the local church depending on locality - this is not important here except insofar as it demonstrates that the exploiting entiy can differ even whilst the form of exploitation remains the same) and are able to keep the rest - something that does not happen in North Korea except for the small private plots that peasants are allowed to keep for themselves, which are part of the capitalist economy because what is not consumed is sold as a commodity. Before you ask, no, the existence of a "monarchy" (it is not actually relevant that Kim Jong-il is Kim Il-sung son's because Marxists recognize that societies are dominated by classes, and that the ruling class can and generally does remain the same even when the individual who happens to be in charge of the state at a given time changes, or when the state changes from being authoritarian into a bourgeois-democratic state) does not make North Korea feudal, because feudalism is a mode of production, defined in terms of its relations of production, i.e. the way in which the ruling class goes about extracting and accumulating surplus value.

[BobKKKindle$]

You answered it yourself. A state need not have a single class as its ruling class.So what are the multiple ruling classes that exist in North Korea? Do you think it's also possible for the bourgeois state to represent the interests of more than one class, let's say the interests of both the proletariat and the bourgeoisie at the same time?

[Black Sheep]

1)Post good stuff about the DPRK

2)Get a shitload of thanks from specific comrades

3)Enjoy the tendency war


The official government statement is as follows:
The official government statements can differ from the facts,you know.
And in addition, neither did the USSR's authorities care about suppression of the homosexuals (Cubans did however:D).

Maybe these minor offers, matched with a greater living than capitalism,no unemployment and the illusion of socialism and self-management (sided with kick-ass propaganda and the idol worship of DPRK's demigod past general secretaries) keep the people of NK 'satisfied' and numb, and give reasons for OP and other supporters of failed 'workers' states to post such trivial matters - trivial, when opposed to the counter arguments for DPRK and other similar catastrophies.

[Shin Honyong]

keep the people of NK 'satisfied' and numb,

The DPRK's population isn't even "satisifid" or numb like how most people put it. Most people look at Pyongyang and forget that the almost everyone there works for the government and represent the elite. Parts of the countryside have essentially overthrown the Stalinist government and have been running their own autonomous economies for years now. DPRK is actually having major problems controlling the new "farmers markets" that have risen within this decade. Quiet sad really considering how much support for Socialism existed during the independence period.

[punisa]

1)Post good stuff about the DPRK

2)Get a shitload of thanks from specific comrades

3)Enjoy the tendency war


Right, so sharing information and learning about specific topics like homosexuality in DPRK is in fact my little plan to harvest thanks and start the "tendency war" ?
If you disagree with what is said, please say so - challenge it, counterargument it, bury it if you must. But please comrade, stay clear of such accusations.
The "tendency wars" of any sort are completely counterproductive and degrade all conversations and all topics.



The official government statements can differ from the facts,you know.

I said the exact thing, I believe at least 3 times in this thread.
If you took time to read before you respond, you would spot it.

[Искра]

Bourgeois states cannot metaphysically change into workers states overnight. I'd argue that DPRK, along with Cuba, is midway in its transformation towards a workers' state. I don't have an absolutist view of history where it has to be either a fully functional idealist workers' state or else its a "capitalist" state. If you have such a fake standard towards socialism, it just tells the working class that socialism always remains some sort of a magical ideal far away in the future where everything is rosy and people start farting rainbows, but most importantly, an ideal that can never be achieved. This is what separates debating societies from actual revolutionaries who achieve real success and win victories for the working class.
And the "workers state" is the end of the process? That's hell of a slow transformation. I hope that there would be people left when it's becomes communism.

[scarletghoul]

Are you the same socialist who used to be a really annoying (ultra)left communist?

[ls]

Sadly you don't understand fully, so I will have to elaborate.

I don't buy your shit about 'homosexuality does not exist with Asian people' which is what you're saying, it's a croc of shit, sorry but you're talking complete and utter bollocks.


First I'd like to add (I think someone already posted about it), Confucianism is a heavy influence on many Asians, including the Koreans.

And you could argue Fascism and the Catholic church was a massive influence on the Spanish, on Italians, you are simply not understanding that a 'people' cannot have barely any homosexuality, that is not the way people work.


Not to mention the other heavy influence of Juche- that said you'd obviously notice a lack of homosexuality in individuals, and even for South Koreans, you barely see it.

It's quite badly discouraged, in fact LGBTQ rights in S. Korea seem pretty bad from what I can make out, it's not a good example to use at all.


And finally, I doubt it's almost in existence, which I mean it still could exist, but only in real small numbers.

Great, now show me proof that somehow there is no homosexuality in any nation?

[Walt]

I don't buy your shit about 'homosexuality does not exist with Asian people' which is what you're saying, it's a croc of shit, sorry but you're talking complete and utter bollocks.

And you could argue Fascism and the Catholic church was a massive influence on the Spanish, on Italians, you are simply not understanding that a 'people' cannot have barely any homosexuality, that is not the way people work.

It's quite badly discouraged, in fact LGBTQ rights in S. Korea seem pretty bad from what I can make out, it's not a good example to use at all.

Great, now show me proof that somehow there is no homosexuality in any nation?

You missed my point. All I was going at was that there were small numbers of homosexuals in the DPRK for several reasons, which I pointed out. That's the case I made, and there are many articles of reading related to this topic. Homosexuality in R of Korea are a taboo, the reason I pointed out South Korea was because of the relation to North Korea...

[BobKKKindle$]

Homosexuality in R of Korea are a taboo, the reason I pointed out South Korea was because of the relation to North Korea... The fact that homosexuality is taboo and that you don't often see homosexual couples in public doesn't mean that homosexuality is any less prevalent than it is in countries like the UK, though, it's just that homosexuals face greater pressure to either remain in the closet, or interact with one another through "underground" communities. I don't think that a country having a Confucian cultural background (which is in any case a big assertion to make - Confucianism is by no means a coherent phenomenon and it's debatable as to whether countries like the ROK can still be described as Confucian in view of all the cultural and economic changes they've experienced in the past half-century or so, in much the same way that it's no longer appropriate to describe the UK as being rooted in Christian ethics) makes people any less likely to be homosexuals as you can see from the fact that Shanghai reportedly has a great gay scene as long as you know where to look, despite homosexuality still technically being illegal in China.

[Walt]

The fact that homosexuality is taboo and that you don't often see homosexual couples in public doesn't mean that homosexuality is any less prevalent than it is in countries like the UK, though, it's just that homosexuals face greater pressure to either remain in the closet, or interact with one another through "underground" communities. I don't think that a country having a Confucian cultural background (which is in any case a big assertion to make - Confucianism is by no means a coherent phenomenon and it's debatable as to whether countries like the ROK can still be described as Confucian in view of all the cultural and economic changes they've experienced in the past half-century or so, in much the same way that it's no longer appropriate to describe the UK as being rooted in Christian ethics) makes people any less likely to be homosexuals as you can see from the fact that Shanghai reportedly has a great gay scene as long as you know where to look, despite homosexuality still technically being illegal in China.
Indeed, not to mention that Koreans don't normally display affection in public areas, so it's even harder to tell. But Confucianism can be contributed due to lower homosexuality rates- people need to understand that the environment plays a big role on the amount of homosexuals as well.

[Outinleftfield]

Indeed, not to mention that Koreans don't normally display affection in public areas, so it's even harder to tell. But Confucianism can be contributed due to lower homosexuality rates- people need to understand that the environment plays a big role on the amount of homosexuals as well.

The environment does play a role as can be seem by the fact that not every identical twin has the same sexual orientation as their twin.

But that doesn't automatically prove that social disapproval is part of the environment that has an effect or even that it would have a negative effect. Environmental effects can include many less obvious factors. And then there's chaos theory. A person's sexual orientation might be influenced by sheer randomness(think quantum mechanics) that is a person becomes straight, gay, or bisexual for no reason or for unpredictable reasons. For example, what a person ate one day at the age of 6 would enter their body and interact with all the other chemicals in the body directly or indirectly and so could potentially influence your sexual orientation among other things. Paradoxically this could have the opposite effect in an entirely different person because it is being added to a different combination of chemicals.

Also in psychology there are times when social disapproval increases the chance of people doing something, although only if they can keep it a secret. There's the "allure of the forbidden" so while people might be less likely to be open about homosexuality they are more likely to be curious about it and at least try it to see if its something they'd like and for the kick of getting away with breaking social taboos.

It's interesting that the allure of the forbidden comes into play for sex, drugs, music, minority religious rituals, clothing, but not things such as murder or rape. I think this shows that our brains are preconditioned to empathy for our fellow human beings but also for own personal autonomy. When told something is bad that clearly hurts others we readily agree with it because at some level it already feels wrong. When told something is bad that doesn't hurt others or doesnt clearly hurt others(i.e. shoplifting's effects aren't immediately visible so the "thrill of the forbidden" phenomenon still leads people to shoplift) people are tempted to do it but at the same time want to keep it a secret and fear others knowing.

[Demogorgon]

The fact that homosexuality is taboo and that you don't often see homosexual couples in public doesn't mean that homosexuality is any less prevalent than it is in countries like the UK, though, it's just that homosexuals face greater pressure to either remain in the closet, or interact with one another through "underground" communities. I don't think that a country having a Confucian cultural background (which is in any case a big assertion to make - Confucianism is by no means a coherent phenomenon and it's debatable as to whether countries like the ROK can still be described as Confucian in view of all the cultural and economic changes they've experienced in the past half-century or so, in much the same way that it's no longer appropriate to describe the UK as being rooted in Christian ethics) makes people any less likely to be homosexuals as you can see from the fact that Shanghai reportedly has a great gay scene as long as you know where to look, despite homosexuality still technically being illegal in China.
A good post, though I would just like to amend that homosexuality was legalised in 1992 in China.

[Искра]

When you do the magical transformation into classless stateless society and communism overnight, do let me know.
Yeah, "the biggest" Stalinist argument(?) is that only them are realistic and the reasonable, and the rest of us are just living in a fairytale.
Clap-clap.
So, creating another repressive system in which will millions of people die from famine (off course, that just economical miscalculation - like in China, or imperialist plot like in USSR), diseases, cold, bad living conditions etc. in which will people stand in lines for bread, in which will high Party members live like bourgeoisie, act like bourgeoisie, and essentially be upper class which exploit working class because of State needs... is good and realistic transformation to communism, while direct democratic, anti-authoritarian way is fairytale.
I hope that one day you'll fall into time machine and end up as Chechen proletarian in USSR.

[the last donut of the night]

Neat to see that info, just goes to show the achievements of the Korean people in the DPRK.

Woe, the sarcasm!


Public displays of affection aren't seen as "wrong" like they're evil or anything, it's just not what people do in Korean culture.

I never said that they were evil. Also, nice doublespeak here. Back in my native Brazil, you can be beaten for a kiss with a person of the same person. That's why people don't do it. The same thing works for the Korean culture. People may not engage in certain behaviors because these behaviors lead to negative repercussions. This is doublespeak because you try to lead us to think that gays in Korea don't kiss in public just because it may be offensive in the culture. It's not only that, it's that gays are not seen as proper citizens in the DPRK (in fact, their existence is denied).

Also, why should kissing in public be wrong? Are you OK with the Korean culture on this one?


That's less of a political statement than a cultural one, and your conflation of the two is insensitive at best.

Being a Marxist, I think you should know that almost all cultural statements lead to political statements. Societies' politics are run on various cultural ideas. You criticize a cultural behavior, and you end criticizing various political statements based on that cultural one.


how gay communities in capitalist societies differ from the culture in socialist societies.

That's funny. I don't remember them making a rational analysis of gay communities in capitalist societies and 'socialist' societies. They in fact said that homosexuals in the DPRK were never subject to repression. Which is the biggest bullshit in the metaphorical barn yard.

P.S: The DPRK isn't a socialist society. I don't remember Marx describing socialism as "a state run by the Party bureaucracy, where the general populace eats shit for breakfast, and an entire cult is based on a dead president. Note that in said society, workers have no power whatsoever. workers' power in fact, is pwned. Workers = n00bs."



And the government did NOT say that all LGBTs are "classist, promiscuous or consumerist", it specifically said that "popular gay culture" at large in capitalist countries glorifies certain aspects over others, which is a valid point.

That assertion has been made numerous times. And I doubt you can prove it now.


Don't try to stretch the DPRK's position out of context. You're ascribing values and motivations (and words) to the DPRK that simply have no basis here. What you're doing would be like watching an episode of the Boondocks that criticizes some aspects of Black culture in America and saying "the Boondocks is saying that most Black people are stupid and lazy!" It's just not like that.

Now you're the one stretching my words.


And none of that contradicts what the DPRK was saying, which was not directed towards LGBT individuals AT ALL. Once again, your perspective is hopelessly warped because you desperately want to convince yourself of the following:

It is not aimed at LGBT individuals, but it is full of lies about them. Thus, somebody gotta make a point about this B.S.

But yes, oh my, let us see what is following!


I knew it was coming sooner or later, the self-satisfied socialist-bashing we're all too familiar with.

lol wut?

In all seriousness, I'm not a socialist-basher. Because there's no socialism to bash, silly!



Sorry, but this kind of drivel isn't worth a response, in no small part because it would distract us from how mistaken you are on the important points above.

Well, I don't think you noticed, but you wrote a pretty big response to my post. Good job, bucko. :thumbup1:

No wonder the Stalin-kiddies love you. You make no sense!

[chegitz guevara]

You are denying that homosexuality exists in Pyongyang and in the countryside, which is simply absurd.

No, that's not what he's doing at all.

[communard resolution]

What science is that? How have they come to recognise it as a "genetic trait"? There is no conclusive evidence that confirms that...

Perhaps the same science that found hair length affects human intelligence! :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let%27s_trim_our_hair_in_accordance_with_the_socia list_lifestyle

[manic expression]

I never said that they were evil.

I said that you implied that the DPRK unfairly discriminates against public displays of affection by LGBTs, which, as I noted, has no basis. As I said, a lack of PDA isn't the same as oppression, especially when it's a part of wider cultural behaviors (we'll get to this later).


Also, nice doublespeak here. Back in my native Brazil, you can be beaten for a kiss with a person of the same person. That's why people don't do it. The same thing works for the Korean culture.And you know this how? Do you have ANY evidence that the treatment of homosexuals in Brazil is in ANY way similar or comparable to that of North Korea? Or, as seems most apparent, did you just pull it out of thin air? At this point, your entire argument rests on nothing but a creative imagination: you say that homosexuals in North Korea are physically intimidated out of PDA, but your evidence for this is first-hand experience from...Brazil. Exactly.


People may not engage in certain behaviors because these behaviors lead to negative repercussions. This is doublespeak because you try to lead us to think that gays in Korea don't kiss in public just because it may be offensive in the culture. It's not only that, it's that gays are not seen as proper citizens in the DPRK (in fact, their existence is denied).The DPRK's statement, around which this entire thread revolves, not only recognizes the existence of LGBT DPRK citizens, but defends their rights at every step. How could they deny the existence of LGBT citizens when they categorically reaffirm their rights as LGBT citizens?

Further, from what I've seen, Korean culture isn't big on PDA, heterosexual or otherwise. You make it seem like heterosexual couples in the DPRK are making out all over the place while homosexuals are expected not to. Until you show us that there is a clear double standard with regard to homosexual and heterosexual PDA, you have nothing here.


Also, why should kissing in public be wrong? Are you OK with the Korean culture on this one?I believe the Korean workers have the right to define what is and isn't a proper public display of affection, so long as those values are applied to all sexual persuasions equally. In fact, from everything we've seen on this thread, this is exactly what the workers of Korea have done in the DPRK in this instance.


Being a Marxist, I think you should know that almost all cultural statements lead to political statements. Societies' politics are run on various cultural ideas. You criticize a cultural behavior, and you end criticizing various political statements based on that cultural one.Perhaps in some cases, but cultural practices have their own place in society that is independent of politics. Ballet was the product of absolutist courts of the Baroque age, but in spite of this, the art was promoted heavily after the October Revolution, not to mention the Cuban Revolution (where ballet enjoys a widespread popular following; check out the link below). Ballet, the creation of monarchical regimes, has been embraced by working class states of many countries. Culture, in many instances, transcends politics.

On Cuban ballet:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1083/is_3_81/ai_n18630584/

If you find that example to be too tangential, let's look at this issue. Right now, I'm writing this post from Germany, a bourgeois society by any definition. I was born and raised in the US, another bourgeois society (to say the least). However, approaching the opposite sex in public life is VERY different here than what I'm accustomed to in the US. Germans, in my experience, are less open to randomly flirting with a girl/guy on the street or even in a cafe. If you walk around NYC enough, you'll see guys leaning out the passenger window of their friend's cars, calling to a "shorty" for a block or two before driving away...I have NEVER seen this happen in Germany, and I doubt I ever will, because the cultures are simply not the same. But who would be silly enough to argue that the mode of production in Germany is fundamentally different from that in the United States? That's my point, there are a wide number of cultural factors in everyday behavior, and there are innumerable examples to show this.


That's funny. I don't remember them making a rational analysis of gay communities in capitalist societies and 'socialist' societies. They in fact said that homosexuals in the DPRK were never subject to repression. Which is the biggest bullshit in the metaphorical barn yard.Who is "them"?


P.S: The DPRK isn't a socialist society. I don't remember Marx describing socialism as "a state run by the Party bureaucracy, where the general populace eats shit for breakfast, and an entire cult is based on a dead president. Note that in said society, workers have no power whatsoever. workers' power in fact, is pwned. Workers = n00bs." I don't remember Marx saying that either, probably because he wasn't gullible enough to swallow imperialist propaganda without the slightest bit of critical thought, which is essentially what you just did.


That assertion has been made numerous times. And I doubt you can prove it now.Read the original statement again. No, wait, let me help you out:

Therefore, the DPRK rejects many characteristics of the popular gay culture in the West, which many perceive to embrace consumerism, classism and promiscuity.

"Popular gay culture" is not, by any rational characterization, equal to LGBT individuals. That would be like saying a criticism of MTV is a criticism of every teenager in America. Criticizing a popular culture is just that, criticizing a popular culture of a bourgeois society. So really, the statement proved my contention three pages ago.

And if you meant to say that I can't prove that LGBT culture in capitalist countries embrace consumerism, classism and promiscuity, that's easy. All you have to do is watch a variety of bourgeois movies that portray homosexuals as promiscuous or single-minded aficionados of expensive clothes. Or, if you'd prefer a more first-hand approach, just walk the streets and clubs of an established gay quarter in any capitalist city. You're bound to find a pretty strong streak of promiscuity. And if you haven't done this yet, I'm tempted to wonder how much exposure to popular gay culture you've actually experienced.


Now you're the one stretching my words.How so? You took a statement that criticized the popular culture pushed by the bourgeoisie, and tried to portray it as an attack on all LGBTs, everywhere. That's exactly like watching an episode of The Boondocks and saying the cartoon criticizes all Blacks.


It is not aimed at LGBT individuals, but it is full of lies about them. Thus, somebody gotta make a point about this B.S.If it's not addressed to LGBT individuals (as you said yourself), how could it be lying about individuals it's not aimed at? The statement was clearly about popular gay culture in capitalist countries, which IS, to a considerable extent, focused on consumerism and promiscuity. The DPRK is saying that LGBT individuals deserve better than being stereotyped into sex fiends or "good shoppers" (as they are by capitalist societies), they deserve to be treated and seen as human beings equal to any other; that includes the realization that LGBTs act essentially the same as heterosexuals in public, something you apparently believe is a form of oppression.


In all seriousness, I'm not a socialist-basher. Because there's no socialism to bash, silly! The only evidence you've shown for this is your dislike of Kim Jong-Il, which isn't exactly the most persuasive of arguments. Coincidentally, your charges of North Koreans eating "shit for breakfast" is almost identical to the anti-Korean slander launched by every American president since Truman.


Well, I don't think you noticed, but you wrote a pretty big response to my post. Good job, bucko. :thumbup1:

No wonder the Stalin-kiddies love you. You make no sense!I don't think you noticed that those criticisms were addressed directly and exclusively to your last paragraph. The first portions of your post were worth responding to for a variety of reasons, partially because they were somewhat substantive and contributed to further discussion. Your last paragraph, however, was well below these standards, and I made a clear differentiation between the two in my first post. In light of this, it's safe to conclude that you thought my post made no sense simply because you weren't paying close enough attention.

[Wanted Man]

It is interesting, but I wonder if it's accurate. Given the website that it comes from, I wonder if it is written by the Korean Friendship Association, who may be inclined to make their own interpretation. It's kind of hard to just make judgements on these things on the internet.

What can be said is that it is a progressive policy compared to the rest of the region, but that it is probably hampered by cultural attitudes towards sexuality and taboos. That's why "homosexuality does not exist here/is not talked about".

RedManatee: a Catholic lecturing people on homophobia? Well, now I've seen it all.

[Jethro Tull]

many characteristics of the popular gay culture in the West, which many perceive to embrace consumerism, classism and promiscuity."

This is definitely an apt description of mainstream queer culture in "the West"...however, the cynic in me doubts the Pyongyang night-club scene is more ascetic...