Gender Issue Heats Up Campus Community
Gender Issue Heats Up Campus Community
  • Reporter Jung Han-kyu
  • 승인 2012.02.10 18:30
  • 댓글 0
이 기사를 공유합니다

The Trigger
The beginning of the crisis was when PIA (The full-name is not known) - an independent, unauthorized student group formed to arouse issues surrounding human rights - posted the result of a survey on Dec. 20 regarding the school members’ opinions on homosexuality.

The result of the survey contains several charts from the questions asked through the survey. The questions were generally asked questions such as “what do you think about homosexuality?” or “What do you think is the cause of homosexuality?”Also included was the pie chart to the question, “what is your sexual orientation?”

 

▲ The list left and chart right above are the direct copies from PIA's research, which 140 students participated in. Intended or not, there is a possiblities that the statistics is misled. The detailed explanation is in "1. PIA's Somewhat Deliberate Tendency of Surveying is Questionable." The negatively dictated comments and posts that fired the arguments could not be captured for their removal.

 

Survey Result and One Hostile Post
The result to the question was 91% were heterosexual and 9% were LGBQ. What is LGBQ? Nobody, except those whom had previous knowledge, knew what it was. It seems the Korean students are not well-educated to diversity; the opposite of heterosexual is obviously homosexual to them. B (Bisexual) or Q (Questioning) are not in knowledge.

On bulletin boards of POVIS and PosB, questions surrounding if the ratio of homosexuality was as high as 10% began to arise.

The posting of the trouble then appeared. A senior posted with hostile tone and connotation that the homosexuals should be isolated. Then he personalized how sick and abnormal homosexuality is. This was where punches came in. Angered by his insults, the liberals posted multiple lectures on tolerance, equality or the science of homosexuality. There were also some requests to take down the writings. The bulletin board was soon ripe with arguments and his words left irreparable scars on those who were hurt.

His Perspective
Eradicating all the emotional adjectives, in simple terms, his main point was that he did not want a person who has potential to be sexually attracted residing in the same room, as the girls would not want boys residing in the same room.

His words are rather liberal and progressive. He is taking romantic attraction of non-heterosexuals equal to that of heterosexuals without hypocrisy. If a heterosexual man and woman cannot stay in the same room, homosexual men or women should not stay with the same sex, or all should be able to share a room genderlessly. This is actually practiced in more liberal and diversity-tolerant cultures like the United States.

Case Study, the Only Answer, but that Cannot be Realized
According to the National Student Gender blind Campaign, around 50 well-known colleges in the United States including Stanford, Cornell, Dartmouth, Columbia, UC Berkeley, the University of Michigan, and Harvey Mudd colleges have practiced or recently began practicing the mixed-gender dorm rooms. This basically removes all the sexual biases mentioned above. Again, it is the only answer but that cannot be realized.

Beside the Mainstream Issue Itself… But Potentially More Important Issues
 
1. PIA’s Somewhat Deliberate Tendency of Surveying is Questionable
Different from the questions in the survey which had five selections, “heterosexual,” “homosexual,” “bisexual, “non-binding,” “don’t know,” the chart in the result of the survey to the question had only two divisions: “heterosexual” with 91% and “LGBQ” with 9%. And there were no explanations to what LGBQ - Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Questioning - was. It was easily misunderstood if the homosexual population was 10% of the student body.

In addition, “non-binding” and “don’t know” went to LGBQ. “Non-binding” and “don’t know” are controversial in that though they might fall into Q, questioning, though it does not mean they are not heterosexual. They are just not sure if they are heterosexual or other. They are just potential minorities. Also, “don’t know” is different from questioning.“Don’t know” is not the status which a person is not aware whereas questioning is the status which a person began suspecting.

This was another statistics flaw. PIA needed to explain that LGBQ does not necessarily stand for homosexuality.

Perhaps, the credibility to the survey result, before the arguments over the hostility of the argument-causer, was better to be re-examined. But the objective analysis might’ve been too hard before the burning collective irrationality caused by one man’s cruel messages.

This matter was once arisen when PIA announced the result to the survey on students’ opinions towards POSTECH school regulations. If PIA wants more support and trust, it needs to reconsider if it is playing fairly.

2. Hole in School BBS Management is Present
If not commercially-binding or legally-binding, the manager of a certain database has an obligation to secure and maintain the posts that have been listed. It means though some posts are publicly declined or falsified, if it is not a commercial or porn, the system manager needs to let them be.

Though the post that began the argument was extremely bigoted, it did not have direct swears but personal feelings toward non-heterosexuals.

What really happened was that people began posting to delete the man’s posts and did the school. The BBS Managers need to equip the philosophy as DBA (Database Administrator). Whatever the populism and crowds causes, the system needs to have its own way.


댓글삭제
삭제한 댓글은 다시 복구할 수 없습니다.
그래도 삭제하시겠습니까?
댓글 0
댓글쓰기
계정을 선택하시면 로그인·계정인증을 통해
댓글을 남기실 수 있습니다.