By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following remarks suggesting the “import” of Vietnamese and Sri Lankan women to address South Korea’s low birth rate, Governor Kim Hee Soo was expelled from the Democratic Party. His televised comments, which proposed marrying foreign women to rural South Korean men, sparked outrage and a diplomatic protest from Vietnam. While Mr. Kim issued an apology for his “inappropriate language” and for undermining human dignity, the party unanimously voted for his expulsion. The South Jeolla Province also apologized for the deeply hurtful and discriminatory nature of his statements, vowing to reinforce oversight to prevent future occurrences.
Read the original article here
The expulsion of a South Korean official for suggesting the “importation” of women to address the nation’s plummeting birth rate has ignited a global conversation, highlighting a deeply concerning, yet sadly not entirely surprising, approach to a complex societal issue. This official, Kim Hee Soo, governor of Jindo county, articulated a proposal during a town hall meeting to “import young unmarried women” from countries like Sri Lanka and Vietnam, intending for them to marry young men in rural areas. This statement, made public, understandably sparked outrage and even a diplomatic protest from the Vietnamese embassy in Seoul, which correctly characterized the remarks as reflecting problematic values and attitudes towards migrant women and minority groups.
The immediate consequence for Mr. Kim was his expulsion from his political party, a swift action that, while not a complete removal from his position, signifies a strong public condemnation of his deeply insensitive and dehumanizing suggestion. The incident, however, is far from an isolated one; it taps into a recurring, troubling undercurrent in discussions about South Korea’s demographic challenges. For a considerable time, the reality of women from Southeast Asia marrying men in South Korea’s countryside has been a contributing factor to birth rates in rural areas. The governor’s proposal, in essence, advocated for a more organized, state-sanctioned version of this existing trend, framing women as a resource to be acquired rather than individuals with agency and rights.
This notion of women as commodities, like “corn or potatoes,” to be “planted” in a country to yield a “baby harvest,” is a stark and disturbing illustration of how some perceive women, particularly in the context of demographic policy. The underlying assumption is that women are primarily reproductive vessels, whose purpose is to fulfill national quotas for birth rates, ignoring the myriad of personal, social, and economic factors that influence people’s decisions about family planning. The criticism levied against such thinking is profound: it suggests a willful blindness to the fundamental changes within society that are actually driving down birth rates, focusing instead on a simplistic, objectifying solution.
Indeed, the underlying issues are far more nuanced than a mere shortage of women. South Korea, like many developed nations, grapples with immense pressures on young people, particularly women. The relentless demands of a hyper-competitive work culture, the immense cost of living, the pressure to pursue extensive postgraduate education, and the prohibitive expenses associated with childcare all contribute to a scenario where starting and raising a family becomes an overwhelming prospect. The idea that simply “importing” women will solve these deeply entrenched societal problems is, to put it mildly, an exercise in folly. It’s a distraction from the real work needed to create an environment where people *want* to have children.
The historical parallels to “catalog women” in Germany, where women were essentially ordered for marriage by men unwilling to embrace feminist ideals, are chillingly relevant. This historical precedent, amplified by the ease of global communication in the modern era, suggests a disturbing trend, particularly among those who cling to traditional, patriarchal views and believe they can find partners who will conform to a submissive, “traditional wife” role. This is a far cry from genuine partnership and equality. The alternative, and far more constructive, path involves adjusting policies to alleviate the pressures that deter people from having families. This includes addressing work-life balance, ensuring living wages, providing affordable and accessible childcare, and generally creating a more supportive and less financially burdensome environment for raising children.
The observation that South Korea is on an “accelerated path to societal collapse due to low birthrates and immigration” underscores the urgency of the situation, but it does not justify inhumane or dehumanizing solutions. The proposed solution also raises further ethical questions about the fate of the children born from such arrangements. Will they face discrimination or ostracism due to their mixed heritage? Children, regardless of their background, deserve to be raised in safe and supportive environments, not as a byproduct of a demographic strategy. The underlying sentiment of treating women as interchangeable parts in a societal machine is deeply troubling, and frankly, the comparison to “Trump and Epstein’s ghost” highlights the deeply unsettling and transactional nature of such propositions.
The argument that this is simply a more overt form of what other countries, including China, have been doing “on the hush-hush” does not legitimize the practice. It merely suggests a widespread ethical deficit. The core of the problem lies in the societal structures that make it so challenging for individuals to form families. If politicians are panicking about birth rates but not advocating for policies like robust paternity leave, shorter workweeks, higher wages, increased worker rights, and significant intervention in the housing market, their sincerity is questionable. Their statements often translate to a desire for women to fill a void without addressing the underlying reasons for that void.
The discussion also touches upon the broader concept of immigration, with some suggesting that South Korea could achieve similar demographic goals by welcoming families with young children from impoverished nations, thereby improving their lives while also addressing South Korea’s own workforce needs. This stands in stark contrast to the governor’s proposal, which sounds more akin to a transactional arrangement rather than genuine integration and mutual benefit. The idea of “importing” women can be framed in extremely problematic ways, ranging from facilitated immigration for marriage to outright mail-order bride scenarios, all of which carry significant ethical baggage.
While the governor may have “put his foot in his mouth,” the underlying sentiment that women are a resource to be acquired, even if rooted in the observed reality of cross-cultural marriages, is still deeply flawed. The critique that this issue has “flown right past the educated men of Reddit” suggests a broader societal struggle to confront the real drivers of declining fertility. The idea that North Korea might eventually become the “true Korea” purely because South Koreans face extinction is a bleak, albeit hyperbolic, commentary on the perceived trajectory of the nation’s demographic future.
The physical and emotional toll of pregnancy and childbirth, often downplayed by those who advocate for increased birth rates, is also a critical point often overlooked. The immense costs, the bodily changes, and the lifelong commitment are significant factors that influence individuals’ decisions about starting a family. The idea that women should simply “get preggo, no big deal” is a gross oversimplification and a testament to a profound lack of empathy. It’s no wonder that women, facing such attitudes and societal pressures, might feel terrified and find their situation significantly harder than men.
The swift action taken against Mr. Kim, while welcome, is also presented as a point of comparison for other nations, particularly the United States, where political accountability for controversial statements can sometimes be perceived as lacking. The consequences of such remarks are important for setting societal norms and signaling values. The idea that people have become so desensitized, perhaps due to pervasive online content, that they have lost basic etiquette and decorum is a concerning observation. The demand for “white women” and similar sentiments reveal a deeply rooted xenophobia and a warped perception of societal problems.
Treating women as mere instruments to fix demographic issues demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of why birth rates are falling. The solution lies not in replacing women or coercing them, but in addressing the systemic issues that make life unsustainable or unappealing for potential parents. The global concern over birth rates is understandable, but the approaches vary wildly. The creation of families requires a stable foundation, which includes a living wage and adequate time for personal and familial development. The current societal pressures, particularly the relentless drive for career advancement by a certain age, directly conflict with the responsibilities of raising children.
The proposal, even if couched as a suggestion for “immigration” in the sleaziest terms possible, is indicative of a deeper societal misogyny that labels women who resist these expectations as “crazy” or other derogatory terms. The advice for politicians to simply “STFU” to improve their electoral chances highlights the public’s weariness with tone-deaf and offensive pronouncements. The notion of international “trafficking” and tariffs associated with such a proposal is a grim and accurate reflection of the transactional nature of the governor’s suggestion.
The critique that Western nations also import people to mask birth rate issues, while potentially true, doesn’t excuse South Korea’s proposed solution. The fundamental problem is a lack of resources, space, and hope, leading to feelings of being “squeezed” and anxious about the future. Instead of such drastic and ethically dubious measures, the suggestion of allowing families with young children to emigrate to South Korea presents a more humane and mutually beneficial approach. This would not only improve the lives of those in poverty but also bolster South Korea’s workforce and secure its future.
The humorous suggestion of importing “lovable himbos” to father more children, while lighthearted, still points to the underlying desire for increased procreation without acknowledging the complex realities of family building. The idea of legal protection for surrogate mothers also enters the conversation, indicating the multifaceted nature of reproductive and family planning considerations. Ultimately, the governor’s remarks can be seen as promoting immigration in the most distasteful manner possible, a sentiment that would likely not find its way onto any official travel brochures.
The punishment of the official, while framed by some as a positive example of political accountability, is also viewed by others as the public scapegoating of someone who vocalized what many countries do covertly. The desire for better treatment of women is paramount, as evidenced by the account of a South Korean woman who chose to raise her daughter in the US due to her dissatisfaction with the cultural treatment of women in her home country. The implication is clear: “importing” women will not fix the underlying cultural issues that make South Korea an undesirable place for many women to live and raise families. The remark, ultimately, boils down to a failure to address why people aren’t having kids, opting instead for a superficial and harmful fix. The effectiveness of consequences for politicians and the need for genuine democratic processes are highlighted, alongside the stark reality that fostering a xenophobic and soul-crushing environment will only lead to such problematic proposals. The core issue remains the refusal to address the societal and economic factors that deter people from having children, preferring instead to treat women as a disposable commodity.