Making the ‘modern’ family: The discourse of sexuality in the Family Planning Program in South Korea

Abstract

Sexuality in the Family Planning Program (FPP) has been largely overlooked, even though the practice of birth control is inextricably connected with procreative behavior. Focusing on the sexuality discourse of the FPP in South Korea, this article examines the process of constructing an intimacy sphere and making modern families in a non-western society. The FPP was adopted as national policy and implemented by the military junta during the repressive dictatorship in the 1960 and 1970s. However, contrary to the public perception of FPP as a coercive intervention into people’s personal lives, the FPP took a critical stance regarding the repression of sexuality and stressed the pleasurable aspect of sexuality, disconnecting it from procreation and associating it with love. By analyzing this unexpected aspect, this article highlights that the emphasis on the association of sex, love and marriage was a western concept ushered into the modern Korean family in a postcolonial context. Women’s sexual desire was justified and encouraged—but conversely, women’s autonomy became bound to a sexual dimension and embedded in the marital relationship as the core of the South Korean ‘modern’ family.

Keywords

Family Planning Program modern family population control sexuality discourse South Korea

Introduction

Population control and the family planning programs in non-western societies have been discussed in numerous fields, including anthropology, history, sociology and population studies, ranging geographically from Asia to Africa (Chatterjee and Riley, 2001; Connelly, 2008, 2009; Crane and Finkle, 1989; Gordon, 1990; Greenhalgh, 2008; Hodges, 2004; Mamdani, 1973; Warwick, 1982). The link between sexuality and population control, however, has been overlooked even though it is a crucial part of family planning. Sexuality is indeed ‘at the heart of family planning’ (Abdel-Tawab et al., 2000: 1), as the practice of birth control is connected to procreative behavior. Birth control inevitably deals with the physical process of sexual intercourse as well as the technology to control reproduction. But this connection is rarely acknowledged in actual practice (Moore and Helzner, 1997: 4).

Sexuality in the Family Planning Program (FPP) needs to be carefully scrutinized. As Foucault noted, sex and sexuality are important as being related both to the life of the body and the life of the species; sex works as a standard for the disciplines of the body and as a basis for the regulation of the population (Foucault, 1990: 145–146). The issue of sexuality in the FPP can demonstrate how power is exercised throughout the politics of reproduction. Focusing on sexuality discourse in the FPP, this article examines modern types of subordination. We need to understand the aspect of power in the FPP to foster life and regulate population—the biopower of the population (Foucault, 1990: 135–145).

This article explores the discourse of sexuality in the FPP during the 1960s and 1970s in South Korea. It exemplifies the mechanism of making modern subjects and modern families in non-western developing countries. The South Korean case provides a particular point of entry into the history of East Asia, as it is where the FPP achieved exceptional success (DiMoia, 2008: 362). I do not examine all the aspects of the FPP in South Korea here,¹ but to elucidate my point of view I need to address several arguments regarding the existing studies. The FPP in South Korea has been accused of coercive intervention into individuals’ lives and the instrumentalization of women’s bodies under an authoritarian military dictatorship. It has been criticized for obstructing the women’s movement for birth control, and mobilizing women’s bodies as the instrument for—as well as the target of—the success of its program (Bae, 2005; Moon, 2005; SS Park, 2003).

This study takes a slightly different angle. Approaching the period of military dictatorship in the 1960s and 1970s in South Korea, I focus on the FPP as a modernization project and on its western concept of the modern (Chatterjee and Riley, 2001). Paying special attention to the productive and constructive aspects of power rather than its repressive and coercive features, I will show how power worked throughout the FPP, which constructed sex and sexuality not as means of procreation but as a basis of the conjugal relationship, and how it made the normalization of heterosexual conjugal relationship the core of modernization.

Methodology

This article is part of a larger project to analyze the FPP in South Korea and the governmentality of population control. I focus here on the discursive aspect of the FPP. As long as family planning is related to the reproductive act, it is impossible to disregard sexuality in its discursive practice. This leads to the inevitable construction of the discourse that addresses sexuality in relation to love, marriage, family and gender, all of which are especially important in individual behavior in modern societies (Giddens, 1993; Luhmann, 1998). Furthermore, sexuality discourse entails the aspect of ‘the conduct of conduct’ (Foucault, 2007: 108–109), which causes a change in the demographic structure as well as in individual behavior. Especially in non-western societies, the FPP has involved an intensive modernization discourse to remake people as modern individuals with deeply gendered subjectivity. The sexuality discourse of the FPP, therefore, could illuminate how the modernization project affected women’s lives in non-western societies by constructing spheres of intimacy and making modern families.

In this article, I examine the official publications of Taehan Kajok Kyehoek Hyo˘phoe² (Planned Parenthood Federation of Korea, PPFK), which led the FPP in South Korea since its founding in 1961. PPFK published research reports, promotional leaflets, family planning education and FPP staff training materials. It published official histories of the South Korean FPP in both English and Korean, such as Hano˘guk Kajok Kyehoek Simnyo˘nsa (Ten Years’ History of Korean Family Planning) (PPFK, 1975), Taehan Kajok Kyehoek Hyo˘phoe 20-yo˘nsa (20 Years’ History of PPFK) (PPFK, 1983), KaHyo˘p 30-yo˘nsa (30 Years’ History of PPFK) (PPFK, 1991a), and 30 Years’ History of PPFK (1961–1990) (PPFK, 1991b). I also examine publications written by FPP leaders.

In addition, I have collected articles on the FPP that appeared in South Korea’s daily newspapers and periodicals. Specifically, I delve into the monthly magazine, Kajo˘ng ŭi po˘t, the English title of which is Happy Home. It was the official periodical of PPFK and distributed for free nationwide every month by FPP staffers. It was ‘the guidebook to promote family planning and educate people on family planning’ (PPFK, 1991a: 37); it was ‘a textbook’ of family planning for members of Kajok Kyehoek O˘mo˘nihoe (Family Planning Mothers’ Clubs), a nationwide housewives’ cell group for FPP founded in 1968 (HJ Park et al., 1976). The members of these Mothers’ Clubs were supposed to read every issue of Happy Home and discuss its contents together. I examine the contents of Happy Home from its first issue in 1968 to 1980.

Lastly, to scrutinize the sexuality discourse of the FPP, I examine sex education books published during the period of the FPP in South Korea. PPFK published textbooks for sex education, and some FPP leaders wrote books on sex education. Most important was Sarang ŭi so˘ng kyoyuk (Sex Education with Love), published in 1971 and republished in 1976 with slight revisions and under a new title, Na hana pyo˘l hana : sarang ŭi so˘ng kyoyuk (One Me and the Other the Star:³ Sex Education in Love). This book project involved 15 authors, including medical doctors, university professors and leading staffers of PPFK. It was written for family-planning leaders, parents, elders, or anyone with an interest in sex education.

The Family Planning Program (FPP) in South Korea in the 1960s and 1970s

The FPP has been generally adopted and implemented in the non-western world since the 1960s, in line with the Cold War and international politics (Connelly, 2008; Crane and Finkle, 1989; Donaldson, 1990). South Korea adopted the FPP as national policy in 1961, in the initial stage of an international wave of population control. The estimated Total Fertility Rate (TFR) was 6.3 in 1960 just before the FPP started; it dropped dramatically to 2.06 in 1983, around the population replacement level. No one denies that the contraception methods distributed by the FPP had an important impact on this rapid decline in fertility rates (Donaldson, 1981: 255). The FPP continued through the 1980s and even lingered until the early 1990s, but its main period was from the early 1960s through the 1970s under the Park junta (1961–1979).

It was the military junta shortly after Park Chung Hee’s coup in May 1961 that adopted the FPP as a national policy. This political and historical background largely affected the perception of FPP. The government set an annual goal for specific contraception methods, and this goal was conveyed to each township, health care center, and individual family-planning staff (SS Park, 2001; PPFK, 1975; PPFK, 1991b). The program was primarily implemented by PPFK, a nongovernmental organization but with a semi-official relationship with the government. Most PPFK leaders were medical doctors and policy-making elites involved in public health policies; many were advisory members of the Coup Committee and the military junta (SS Park, 2003). Affiliated to the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), PPFK established city and provincial branches and trained government employees, doctors and family-planning staff (PPFK, 1975: 64–65). In 1968, PPFK organized Family Planning Mothers’ Clubs as nationwide housewife groups at the lowest township level. Mothers’ Clubs were one of the most important factors in the success of the FPP, which earned a national and international reputation for its effectiveness (Cho, 2014; Park et al., 1976; PPFK, 1991a: 37). Mothers’ Clubs were later integrated into Saemaul (New Village) Women’s Clubs in 1977.

There has been widespread criticism of the FPP as a government-driven policy with coercive features, especially regarding the treatment of women’s bodies. Particularly in terms of women’s lives, the FPP is said to be ‘the single most important policy directly involving women in the period of militarized modernity’ (Moon, 2005: 81) in South Korea. Conspicuously successful outcomes of the FPP in the 1960s and 1970s demonstrate the aggressive implementation of the program. It is said that ‘the government-led program for family planning and birth control in the 1960s and 1970s’ was a ‘stark example of state intervention in the family and women’s bodies’ (Choi, 2015: 95). The dissemination of contraceptive technology has been the core object of criticism, for the government promoted intensively the Lippes loop and pills in the 1960s and tubal ligation for women in the 1970s, rather than safer practices such as condoms or rhythm methods (Bae, 2012: 157–177; Choi, 2015: 95–96). Critics also charge that male bureaucrats intervened violently in women’s bodies to further their own policy goals (Bae, 2005: 280) and women were ‘completely excluded and alienated from the process of fertility reduction policy-making, implementation, and evaluation. They were only mobilized for street-level social marketing as family planning field workers in home visiting and face-to-face consultation’ (SS Park, 2003: 66).

However, the focus in this article is that the FPP in South Korea was not limited to the distribution of contraceptives. The Program was not merely about the dissemination of condoms and contraceptive pills, intrauterine device insertion, tubal ligation, vasectomies and laparoscopic surgery. It also included tax incentives, medical benefits, and the construction of knowledge about the population via statistical data collection, research projects, and the establishment of research institutes. But most importantly, successful birth control requires that contraceptive technology be accompanied by new attitudes, ideas, and actual sexual practices.

Sexuality discourse in the Family Planning Program

On 11 July 1973, an article titled ‘Family Planning promotional folding fan … too obscene’ ran in Chosun Ilbo, a daily newspaper in South Korea. The article stated that the ‘Minister of Health and Social Affairs and the Planned Parenthood Federation of Korea are disseminating Family Planning enlightenment folding fans through public health centers nationwide, to encourage people to have two children and raise them well. But the enlightenment cartoons on the fans are too obscene to bring home.’ According to the article, the cartoons depicted ‘a man whose face is full of great expectations lying on the bed, next to which a woman in her nightclothes is taking the contraceptive pill.’ Another man is ‘thinking of a woman while he brings condoms on which ‘what a gentleman always needs to bring’ is written.’ And another ‘man is sticking out his tongue, fully delighted with a woman who whispers’ to him, ‘I’ll also get an IUD—Ttori’s [a common Korean boy’s name] mom told me it is awesome.’ The article stated ‘folding fans are a widely used household item in summer,’ but ‘these fans cannot be used around children who are growing up’ for they ‘are too obscene’ (Chosun Ilbo, 1973).

This article ran in the newspaper under the Yushin System—a state of national emergency, declared in October 1972 by President Park who had seized power by a military coup in May 1961. The National Assembly was dissolved once again and the Constitution was suspended. It was one of the most repressive periods in South Korean modern history. Feminist scholars have characterized this era as a ‘hypermasculinist regime’ (HM Kim, 2001: 57) and as ‘militarized modernity’ (Moon, 2005). FPP was a national policy under the Park junta, and it has affected public memory and the perception of FPP as a repressive governmental program.

Thus, we need to pay attention to this ambivalent feature – that the FPP actively involved sexuality to the extent that it was criticized as an obscenity in this politically repressive era. Unlike the more common understanding of the FPP in South Korea, the discourse on sexuality was produced in diverse forms throughout the program. The government and the PPFK worked to change the public perception of birth control and make the idea and practice of contraception familiar to the populace (Moon, 2005: 82), and sexual issues were involved in this process.

For example, an introductory book entitled Kajok Kyehoek (Family Planning) was published in 1962 at the very beginning stages of the FPP. ‘Regarding sexual intercourse,’ it said, Korean society followed ‘the principle of laissez-faire’ though ‘there have been many people who could not get it spontaneously.’ Thus people ‘did not have sexual harmony with their spouses, which often caused a tragic outcome.’ Therefore, it was necessary to promote ‘education to prevent any obstacles to sexual intercourse’ (Yi and Yi, 1966: 104). Another book published in 1961 was So˘ng Saenghwal kwa Kajok Kyehoek (Sexual Life and Family Planning). The book has two main sections. In the first section, ‘Birth control comes from a rational sexual life,’ it is stated that ‘sexuality is an intrinsic property of human beings’ (CS Park, 1961: 263). It continues, ‘it is a matter of physiological metabolism to have meals three times a day and excrete once; sexuality is the same. It is natural to be sexually active after arriving at puberty, and it is not strange to want to feel pleasure’ (CS Park, 1961: 304).

This emphasis on sexuality also appears in Happy Home. This monthly magazine was one of the most important spaces used for the proliferation of family planning. From the beginning, it was intended to be a popular tool of a far-reaching family planning campaign in South Korea. In this magazine, sex and sexuality were juxtaposed with other family topics. It broadly publicized sexuality topics at a time when ‘it was difficult even to educate people on family planning because sex was a taboo issue’ (PPFK, 1991b: 31). Coverage included medical knowledge and scientific advice, guidance on how to teach children about sex, practical techniques for married couples, essays about their own experiences written by readers and celebrities, and descriptions of sexual customs in foreign (mostly Western) countries. The Q&A section presented experts’ responses to topics such as sexual dysfunction, masturbation, sexual positions and techniques. Its content was not based on prohibition or repression of sexuality. Rather, the FPP criticized the attitudes that made sexuality a taboo topic:

What have we and our children learned throughout the years? … It is unreasonable to view sex merely as a prerequisite for having a baby. In the recreational sense, it would be like a doctor telling a patient that he or she must refrain from a certain type of food, no matter how much he or she craves it, warning the patient that eating the food will result in a stomach ache. However, from the beginning, the sexual acts of human beings have been designed to provide maximum pleasure and enjoyment, as long as the behaviors do not harm other people. (Ŭ Kim, 1974)

The FPP denounced the conservative attitude toward sex and sexuality and stressed the importance of sex education as necessary for a more natural attitude toward sexuality. As a consequence, the FPP shed new light on sex education. The book Sarang ŭi so˘ng kyoyuk (Sex Education with Love) describes the ‘Four Stages of Sexual Intercourse.’ According to the book, the ‘sexual intercourse of humans can be largely classified into four stages: preparatory movement, the main act, the relaxing phase, and the silent stage.’ The first stage was described as follows:

First, the preparatory movement stage for arousing sexual desires and erection refers to fore-act or foreplay, which are motions that naturally induce the next stage. Thus, the individuals fully prepare themselves for the main sexual act by triggering psychological excitement and stimulating the erogenous zone. In addition to the French kiss, foreplay is composed of the following acts: 98% of males stimulate the female breasts by hand and 93% by mouth, and 88% of males stimulate the female genitals by hand and 42% by mouth. In contrast, 91% of females also stimulate the male genitals by hand and 49% by mouth. (PPFK, 1971: 199–200, emphasis in original)

The book discussed the sensitivity of different erogenous zones, and contained pictures of naked men and women and their genitals. It provided detailed information on diverse topics of sexuality, including child and adolescent sexuality, love and dating, marriage, male and female physiology, the phases and process of sexual intercourse, sexual positions, masturbation, and contraception practices.

This is very different from the conventional perception of either sexuality or the FPP during the 1960s and 1970s. Much of the scholarly literature indicates that it was not until the 1980s, with the rise of the Korean feminist movement, when attitudes toward sexuality began to change and it became acceptable to talk about sex in public (Choi, 2015; Shim, 2001).⁴ The 1960s and 1970s were described as part of ‘the long silence on sexuality in Korean culture’ (Shim, 2001: 133). The common perception was that the purpose of contraception, which the FPP distributed during this period, was simply to avoid pregnancy; sexual relations were only for procreation, and sex for pleasure was seen as sinful (Shim, 2001: 141).

However, the FPP explained clearly that the contraception it promoted was in the interest of enjoying sex: ‘The development of science has led to the discovery of contraceptive measures, which have in turn successfully classified the purpose of sexual acts into two parts: childbirth and pleasure.’ Contraceptive measures are ‘the gift that has been granted to humans by modern science.’ Consequently, it became essential in the FPP discourse to understand how ‘to properly distinguish these two purposes from one another and perform sexual acts according to the purpose’ (PPFK, 1971: 37).

Figure 1 shows one example. In this comic strip, run in Happy Home in February 1975, Mrs. Certainly Two⁵ in disguise gives condoms as a surprise gift to her friend’s husband. Next day, she says to her friend who is happily laughing, ‘Wasn’t it fantastic last night?!!’ and her friend shyly replys: ‘Oh my, it was you.’

Figure 1.

Kkok Tul Yo˘sa (Mrs. Certainly Two).

Here we see a strange contradiction. It is true that sexuality was not thought to be a proper topic to talk about in South Korea. For a long time it was taboo to discuss it openly or casually, which was often attributed to ‘a philosophical and cultural system unique to Korea, that is, Confucianism’ (Shim, 2001: 133). In this regard, it is important to note that the FPP criticized the Confucianist tradition and the conservative attitude toward sexuality, in contrast to the scholarly claims that the FPP avoided references to sexuality (Bae, 2005: 268).

Why have the sexual attitudes of the FPP been commonly perceived as repressive? It is reminiscent of the ‘repressive hypothesis,’ which Foucault mentions in The History of Sexuality I. He explains that the discourse on modern sexual repression holds up well because it is easy to uphold (Foucault, 1990: 5). Similar to Foucault, I do not here intend to raise the counterargument that ‘sex has not been prohibited or barred or masked or misapprehended’ (Foucault, 1990: 12) throughout the FPP in South Korea. The focus here is accounting for the facts: What was said about sex and sexuality? Why was it discussed? What were the effects of the power generated by what was said? In other words, what is at issue here is the ‘discursive fact,’ namely, the way in which sex has been ‘put into discourse’ (Foucault, 1990: 11–12).

Women’s sexual desire and the marital relationship

The most salient feature of sexuality discourse in the FPP is its emphasis on female sexual desire and women’s right to enjoy their sexual lives. It was an unambiguous, clear message. In 1969, an article in Happy Home declared:

Most women in rural areas in Korea have been uninterested or passive toward sexuality so far. So they usually followed men’s lead. Since the beginning of the FPP, however, it has changed in the opposite direction to women taking the initiative. Sexuality is now changing into something that people can enjoy. Indeed, this is the silent but great revolution that has been accomplished in our family life in rural areas. (PPFK, 1969)

This passage underscores women’s sexual independence. Not only was women’s sexual satisfaction important, but women’s sexuality is distinguished from that of men. ‘Men’s sexual behavior’ was said to be ‘very simple, taking about 10 seconds from insertion and rub to ejaculation. In contrast, women need much more time and respond very slowly, starting when a man hugs her’ (PPFK, 1971: 201).

In this comparison, women’s sexual responsiveness is described as being very sensitive, and men need to treat it very carefully. According to an article in Happy Home in 1972, ‘Many of the women who are dissatisfied with sexual intercourse with their husbands often ask whether this is related to frequent masturbation before marriage … However, sexual satisfaction fundamentally depends on the sexual techniques of the husband’ (PPFK, 1972a). Therefore, men must understand female sexuality and the emphasis is again on the need for the man’s caution and skill. Consequently, sexual techniques for men were considered an important and crucial part of the full sexual relationship:

Men should try to increase women’s sexual pleasure because it depends on the position of intercourse and the men’s action; this is different from men, who receive sexual stimulation regardless of position. The most sensitive parts of the women are the clitoris, the lower part of the vaginal wall, and the pudendum, so men should take a position to sufficiently rub these parts. Men should stimulate the breast and entire surface as well. (PPFK, 1971: 218)

Women’s sexuality was often discussed in terms of biology or physiology. ‘A woman’s vagina’ was described in detail in many texts—for example, in Happy Home, which said that it ‘is actually surrounded by very strong muscles that circle the central part of the genitals, like lips.’ The description continued:

Its shape is similar to the movements presented by the muscles surrounding the lips as we make the sound ‘a-woo’; it is the state that female genitals become open when the sexual intercourse begins. However, like lip muscles that strongly tighten when we shout ‘warl’ when the female genitals tighten, a man’s symbol [genitals] cannot penetrate through the tightened muscle. If forced to have intercourse in this situation which sounds the alarm, the consequence would be really tragic. (Ŭ Kim, 1975)

In order to avoid this tragic situation, men were advised to learn about female sexuality. With such emphasis on women’s sexuality, a woman’s dissatisfaction with her sexual relationship was described as a pathological condition that needed psychiatric help. As seen in a Q&A session in Happy Home:

It is a sexual dysfunction if you have never arrived at climax for 4 years after you have been married … It could be caused if your husband’s technique is poor, your marital relationship is not good, or you cannot enjoy sex as you live with your husband’s family. It is necessary to change the situation in consultation with a medical specialist if there is a physical reason. Psychological therapy may be necessary if there is a mental reason. (PPFK, 1972a)

However, seeking psychiatric help in the 1960s and 1970s was not a social norm in South Korea. Thus, describing women’s sexual dissatisfaction as a ‘pathological condition’ is noteworthy. The FPP, in trying to emphasize how important women’s sexual satisfaction was, pushed it to an unrealistic degree. This exemplifies the contradiction that characterized the FPP and its discourse on sexuality in light of the conservative attitude toward sexuality that had long prevailed in South Korea.

Many feminist scholars have paid attention to the paradox of women’s sexual pleasure being liberated from procreation. Laslett and Brenner (1989) stated that female sexuality in the West was separated from procreation and became a means of pleasure and personal growth at the dawn of the 20th century. As sexuality became more crucial, however, women’s autonomy was defined in sexual, not in economic or political terms. As women gained the right to sexual enjoyment, ‘marriage and heterosexuality were increasingly defined as expressions of women’s maturity, happiness, and mental health’ (Laslett and Brenner, 1989: 393). This paradox permeated the FPP as well in the 1960s and 1970s in South Korea.

As presented in ‘alliances’ between ‘feminists and neo-Malthusians’ (Hodgson and Watkins, 1997), it is a contradictory process for women to define their own desires, control their reproductive activities and liberate themselves from biological constraints—both in the non-western world where birth control became the target of a population control policy and in the West where the birth control movement was led by women. However, in non-western societies, the meaning of women’s liberation or female emancipation has been far more complicated (Chatterjee and Riley, 2001: 819), as it was associated with modern(ity) which was entangled with the West(ern).

Sexuality and the representations of modern families

The overt goal of the FPP was to reduce the birth rate. One might think, therefore, that it would have been more effective to maintain or fortify the conservative view on sexuality, wherein non-procreative sexual practices or desire are repressed. Thus, in terms of the sexuality discourse of the FPP as I have explored it here so far, we can ask: Why did the official discourse of the FPP take a critical stance toward the repression of sexuality? Why did sexual pleasure gain momentum in the family planning discourse?

Population control is aimed not just at reducing births per se. It is closely connected to the ‘conduct of conduct’ which Foucault termed ‘governmentality’ (2007: 108–109). When Malthus launched the argument for population control in his An Essay on the Principle of Population, published first in 1798 and then republished six times until 1826, he argued for celibacy or abstinence (Malthus, 1999). Population is made up of individuals (Foucault, 2007: 72), and is the target of biopower that focuses on ‘the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes: propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity’ (Foucault, 1990: 139). Biopower cannot be unlinked from the level of individual conduct.

Throughout the FPP discourse on sexual pleasure, sex and sexuality were disconnected from reproduction and associated with love. The FPP linked sexual pleasure to romantic love and heterosexual monogamy within marriage. Sexual incompatibility was designated as ‘the most common reason for divorce’ (Yi and Yi, 1966: 119). This was a contradictory statement, because divorce was almost a taboo in South Korea in the 1960s. Such an unrealistic statement with no supporting evidence shows how strongly the FPP highlighted sexuality. A marriage based on sincere love, in which a man and a woman enjoy a sexual relationship free from the fear of unplanned pregnancy, was said to be the basis of an ideal family. From the specific techniques of sexual intercourse to sex education in the FPP discourse, heterosexual love in a marital relationship was always underscored:

All the 18 sexual techniques we have discussed so far require a sort of self-sacrifice. Love is a sacrifice. Love without sacrifice is not sincere love. Sex is an expression of love. Giving and taking love inevitably requires sacrifice. Therefore, how much you sacrifice means how delightedly and happily you give and take love. Create a natural mood first through light caressing or kissing of the breast, then go slowly down the buttocks after finishing a massage. Then spread the border of the two slopes. Caressing is not only about stimulating sexual nerves; it is also about strongly assigning psychological stability. In some respects, it is not too much to say that caressing is an expression of mental affection. Caressing of the buttocks while keeping this in mind can have effective consequences. (PPFK, 1972b: 21)

The book describes how much a person can show love for her or his spouse by ‘how delightedly and happily’ one ‘gives and takes’ ‘kissing breasts’ or ‘caressing buttocks.’

A female orgasm is not necessary for human reproduction, but it is crucial for modern conjugal life. Women’s attitude toward their sex lives has a big effect on home and family. Enjoying sexual behavior together is absolutely necessary to express love for each other, so both certainly need to reach orgasm. (PPFK, 1971: 201–202)

While the female sexual appetite is not necessary for reproduction, it is an essential factor in the expression of love between two independent individuals in a heterosexual marital relationship, which was newly constructed as the core of the modern family. Most of all, love here is accompanied by individuality, agency, freedom, and the reflexivity of a modern subject. Romantic love combined love with freedom for the first time. Romantic love, which associated sexuality, love and marriage, was a new phenomenon in modern societies (Giddens, 1993: 40). It involved specific ethics and orientations; people got to internalize that specific attitude and relate it to their present and future lives. It became a motivator and a reference point for individual thought and behavior.

In South Korea, the FPP urged men and women to become individuals who freely love, marry and enjoy marital sex, and these ideas permeated the discourse on sexuality. Common customs such as arranged marriages were denounced. A leader of the FPP who was also President of PPFK wrote in Happy Home, ‘In the past, people married and became couples whether they liked it or not, following their parents’ arrangement.’ But in today’s modern times, he said, ‘newly married couples get married’ ‘according to their own intention.’ He continued, ‘This alone is sufficient to tell how truly happy it is that they were not born in the past and enjoy life in the late 20th century’ (Ryu, 1972).

Here ‘the past’ reflects a sense of anachronism that Chakrabarty highlighted in his work, which renders invisible the temporal heterogeneity of the ‘now’ (Chakrabarty, 2000: 243). The FPP claimed: ‘Marriage without love is a pre-modern evil custom in an underdeveloped country’ (Yang, 1972), and ‘What is necessary for prevention of this evil custom is the development of the self-consciousness of sons and daughters who themselves marry.’ It continued, ‘One cannot but then become a person of capacity who can choose his or her own life with stronger independence and critical power’ (PPFK, 1971: 262). It added, ‘An ideal sex life is possible when people can express their love and the counterpart responds to it with love,’ which is the difference between human beings and ‘animals.’ In other words, ‘unlike animals,’ ‘people need sufficient understanding and mental satisfaction with words and behaviors … people need foreplay [of] at least two minutes and then actual intercourse’ (PPFK, 1971: 218). Here ‘animals’ are used to connote non-western customs, as in the commemorative address that appeared in the first issue of Happy Home:

We can’t dump our wish to live well as long as we are human beings. As human beings, we can’t live like beasts. As human beings, we can’t live like worms … Famous scholars all over the world argue that people need to practice family planning in order to live well and have their rights as human beings. (Ryu, 1968)

In this passage, the past and its customs are connected to living ‘like beasts’ and ‘like worms.’ It is also said that family planning brings life to a ‘human being’ and ‘their rights as human beings,’ which connotes the West(ern).

The sex education book also invokes the West with this passage:

It seems almost simultaneous with the time when women’s right to vote was guaranteed by the Constitution that the idea was raised that women can enjoy sex just as men do … it has been thought that women also have the right to enjoy sex and arrive at orgasm as men have done since Queen Victoria began to govern. But women before then did not at all. It is likely, as an old lady said, that women always think of their furniture or housework, whenever men do ‘that work.’

It stresses:

Women’s sexual desire starts with marital life, but they will become disappointed and feel mental frustration unless such desire is satisfied. (PPFK, 1971: 201)

The rise of the ‘home’ was an important part of this context:

Home is necessarily based upon love … A man and a woman need to meet each other and become spouses through love, and then the children they give birth to cannot help but be bound with love. This is the first stage of the view of family which Western people have … [But Korean] people marry based on their parents’ suggestions or economic conditions without love. (PPFK, 1971: 259–261, emphasis added)

Here, the western concepts of modernity, individuality, autonomy and freedom were inserted into non-western contexts. Individuality in sex, love, and marriage marked the West as developed, advanced, and normative, while non-western societies were described as undesirable and primitive. The FPP aspired to a reproductive westernization (Greenhalgh, 1996: 27) and the Westernization of intimacy, reflecting a self-awareness of non-westerners about themselves as having a temporal lag and spatial marginality (Gupta, 1998: 11). The FPP was one of the strongest modernization projects, with the goal of making ‘rational, autonomous individuals who can control their environments and shape their own futures’ (Chatterjee and Riley, 2001: 815). Sexual enjoyment combined with love in the FPP discourse was more than the construction of individuality. It was linked to catching up with the West.

Discussion

Population control cannot simply be reduced to instrumental mobilization and oppressive intervention (Greenhalgh and Winckler, 2005: 212). The population depends on a series of variables such as material surroundings, the climate, the circulation of wealth, customs and moral values, so it cannot be attributable solely to the sovereign’s action. Governing a population thus concerns everything that stimulates and encourages individuals’ desires (Foucault, 2007: 70–73).

This article has examined the FPP’s discourse of sexuality in South Korea by exploring various materials, including periodicals and sex education books in the 1960s and 1970s. By means of archival research and discourse analysis, I focused on sexuality, which was pivotal in the FPP but has been rarely discussed. The FPP aimed at dissociating sexuality from procreation and emphasized it as a source of pleasure. Women’s sexuality was particularly justified in the FPP discourse. The intervention of the FPP in the sex lives of individuals was not restricted either to the instrumental dimension of controlling birthrates or to the technical dimension of contraception or sterilization. Paradoxically, the discourse on sexuality during the military dictatorship was a far cry from any suppression or censorship. Highlighting this contradiction, I showed that the FPP was a project to promote and normalize a specific pattern of individual life.

Family planning in South Korea is an example of the domestication of modernity through a selective indigenization of values of modernity (Chatterjee and Riley, 2001: 811). I have demonstrated that sexuality in family planning discourse, associated with love and marriage, exhibited a selective representation of modernity that closely connects with the assumption of the West as its norm. Women’s sexual desire was justified and encouraged, but conversely, women’s autonomy became bound to a sexual dimension and strongly embedded in the marital relationship that was being newly constructed as the core of the South Korean ‘modern’ family.

The FPP was a nationalist, modernist, and post-colonialist developmental project in which the western concepts of modern(ity) were transplanted, translated, and converted into Korean. Sexuality was central to this process, through the polymorphous techniques of power (Foucault, 1990). It tried to make women into autonomous modern subjects, who were subjected to a modern society as gendered beings. I elaborated how this subjectification worked, why it was part of the modernization project, and what the contradictory and fragmented features were through the sexuality discourse on FPP. As population came to be seen as a problem, the family became an object and target of intervention—an instrument for the governing of the population (Chatterjee and Riley, 2001: 816; Foucault, 1991: 100), in which sexual attitudes, habits and behaviors of individuals are all regulated.

Footnotes

Funding

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2013S1A3A2053799).

Notes

Eunjoo Cho is an assistant professor at Bangmok College of General Studies, Myongji University, South Korea. Her research interests include social knowledge and governmentality; gender, sexuality and subjectification; population and nation-state.

References

Abdel-Tawab

Nawar

(2000) Integrating Issues of Sexuality into Egyptian Family Planning Counseling, New York: Population Council.

Bae

(2005) Women’s body and the state family planning programs in Korea: Examining ‘the modern’ in women’s lives through the social history of birth control. Sahoe wa yo˘ksa (Society and History) 67: 260–299. (in Korean).

Bae

(2012) Human Reproduction in Modern Korea: Women, Motherhood, Family Planning Program, Seoul: Sigan Yo˘haeng.(in Korean).

Chakrabarty

(2000) Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Chatterjee

(1997) Nation And Its Fragments: Colonial And Postcolonial Histories, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Chatterjee

Riley

(2001) Planning an Indian modernity: The gendered politics of fertility control. Signs 26(3): 811–845.

Cho

(2014) Naturalness of population and technology of government: Focusing on the relationship of government–science in the family-planning mothers’ clubs. Hyo˘nsang kwa Insik (The Korean Journal of Humanities and the Social Sciences) 38(4): 181–207. in Korean).

Choi

(2013) New Women in Colonial Korea: A Sourcebook, New York: Routledge.

Choi

(2015) Constructions of marriage and sexuality in modern Korea. In: McLelland

Mackie

(eds) Routledge Handbook of Sexuality Studies in East Asia, New York: Routledge, pp. 87–100.

10.

Chosun Ilbo (1973) Family planning promotional folding fan … too obscene. Chosun Ilbo, 11 July, pp. 7.

11.

Connelly

(2008) Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population, Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

12.

Connelly

(2009) The Cold War in the long duree: Global migration, public health, and population control. In: Leffler

Westad

(eds) The Cambridge History of the Cold War: Volume III, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 466–488.

13.

Crane

Finkle

(1989) The United States, China, and the United Nations Population Fund: Dynamics of US policymaking. Population and Development Review 15(1): 23–59.

14.

DiMoia

(2008) (Let’s have the proper number of children and raise them well!): Family planning and nation-building in South Korea, 1961–1968. East Asian Science, Technology and Society 2(3): 361–379.

15.

Donaldson

(1981) Evolution of the Korean family-planning system. In: Repetto

(eds) Economic Development, Population Policy, and Demographic Transition in the Republic of Korea, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 222–258.

16.

Donaldson

(1990) Nature Against Us: The United States and the World Population Crisis (1965–1980), Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

17.

Foucault

(1990) The History of Sexuality vol I, New York: Vintage Books.

18.

Foucault

(1991) Governmentality. In: Burchell

Gordon

Miller

(eds) The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 87–104.

19.

Foucault

(2007) Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the College de France, 1977–78, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

20.

Giddens

(1993) The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

21.

Gordon

(1990) Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: Birth Control In America, New York: Penguin Books.

22.

Greenhalgh

(1996) The social construction of population science: An intellectual, institutional, and political history of 20th century demography. Comparative Studies in Society and History 38(1): 26–66.

23.

Greenhalgh

(2008) Just One Child: Science and Policy in Deng’s China, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

24.

Greenhalgh

Winckler

(2005) Governing China’s Population: From Leninist to Neoliberal Biopolitics, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

25.

Gupta

(1998) Postcolonial Developments: Agriculture in the Making of Modern India, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

26.

Hodges

(2004) Governmentality, population and reproductive family in modern India. Economic and Political Weekly 39(11): 1157–1163.

27.

Hodgson

Watkins

(1997) Feminists and neo-Malthusians: Past and present alliances. Population and Development Review 23(3): 469–523.

28.

Kim

(2001) Work, nation and hypermasculinity: The ‘woman’ question in the economic miracle and crisis in South Korea. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 2(1): 53–68.

29.

Kim

(1974) Love and happiness of mature men and women. Happy Home. October: 12–13. (in Korean).

30.

Kim

(1975) Sexual tension and unexpected accidents. Happy Home. July: 10., (in Korean).

31.

Laslett

Brenner

(1989) Gender and social reproduction: Historical perspectives. Annual Review of Sociology 15: 381–404.

32.

Luhmann

(1998) Love as Passion: The Codification of Intimacy, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

33.

Malthus

(1999) An Essay on the Principle of Population, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

34.

Mamdani

(1973) The Myth of Population Control; Family, Caste, and Class in an Indian Village, New York: Monthly Review Press.

35.

Moon

(2005) Militarized Modernity and Gendered Citizenship in South Korea, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

36.

Moore

Helzner

(1997) What’s Sex Got To Do With It?: Challenges for Incorporating Sexuality into Family Planning Programs, New York: Population Council.

37.

Park

(1961) So˘ng Saenghwal kwa Kajok Kyehoek (Sexual life and Family Planning), Seoul: Hyo˘phwasa.(in Korean).

38.

Park

Kincaid

Chung

(1976) The Korean Mothers’ Club Program. Studies in Family Planning 7(10): 275–283.

39.

Park

(2001) Global population control: A feminist critique of the fertility reduction policies in the Republic of Korea and the Republic of China (1961–1992), PhD Thesis, Waltham, MA: Brandeis University.

40.

Park

(2003) Fertility control policies in South Korea and Taiwan. New Global Development 19(2): 63–74.

41.

PPFK – Planned Parenthood Federation of Korea, Taehan Kajok Kyehoek Hyo˘phoe – (1969) A model of family planning mothers’ club: Mothers’ club at Sillyo˘ng-ri Taedo˘ng-myo˘n Anso˘ng-gun Kyo˘nggi-do. Happy Home. April, pp. 20–21. (in Korean).

42.

PPFK (1971) Sarang ŭi so˘ng kyoyuk (Sex Education with Love), Seoul: PPFK.(in Korean).

43.

PPFK (1972a) How can the worries in our lives be solved?—Catechetical family management. Happy Home. September: 11.

44.

PPFK (1972b) Twenty sexual wisdoms for having a happy night. Happy Home. October, pp. 20–21.

45.

PPFK (1975) Hano˘guk Kajok Kyehoek Simnyo˘nsa, Seoul: PPFK.(in Korean).

46.

PPFK (1983) Taehan Kajok Kyehoek Hyo˘phoe 20-yo˘nsa (20 Years’ History of PPFK) Seoul: PPFK. (in Korean).

47.

PPFK (1991a) KaHyo˘p 30-yo˘nsa (30 Years’ History of PPFK) Seoul: PPFK. (in Korean).

48.

PPFK (1991b) 30 Years History of PPFK (1961–1990), Seoul: PPFK.

49.

Repetto

Kwon

Kim

(1981) Economic Development, Population Policy, and Demographic Transition in the Republic of Korea, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

50.

Ryu DY (1968) Commemorative address for the first issue. Happy Home. August, p. 5.

51.

Ryu DY (1972) Wife’s wisdom, husband’s wisdom. Happy Home. November, p. 3. (in Korean).

52.

Shim

(2001) Feminism and the discourse of sexuality in Korea: Continuities and changes. Human Studies 24(1/2): 133–148.

53.

Warwick

(1982) Bitter Pills: Population Policies and their Implementation in Eight Developing Countries, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

54.

Yang JD (1972) Family planning you dream. Happy Home November, p. 8. (in Korean).

55.

(1966) Kajok Kyehoek (Family Planning), Seoul: Tongmyo˘ngsa(in Korean).