Now, in my humble opinion, I think rough as the article can be it still doesn‘t reflect 1/3 of the tragic reality the policy caused. So I’m not here to blame Introvigne, but rather to show how this article fits in the framing theory.
If we observe the lack of historical background and any of the positive outcomes regarding the policy makes it clear that the article is against the policy and wants the reader to feel the same way.
The article frame it under ”gendercide” and brings on some very personal, detailed stories, including pictures.
The article goes on to mention four of the bad consequences brought on by the policy, starting with the #heihaizi - which were children, mostly girls, that had to face an out-of-the-book destiny because they were born… girls.
Still in that sentence, the way it says the policy‘s negative effects go on after it was gone, instigates a feeling in the reader that it “must have been indeed ‘that’ bad’.”
We can see in word choices such as “catastrophic”, “negative”, “damages” and even “abolished”, that the article is against the #one-child policy, and will most likely frame it from a negative perspective.
The article starts with “The policy had catastrophic negative effects. Now it has been officially abolished, but damages will continue for decades.”
Let’s look at this article about #China’s one-child #policy, through the lens of Framing theory.
This is the 4th article of a series of 4, written by Massimo Introvigne.
Thing is, Japan isn’t looking to reduce its visitors, but rather spread them out to other less explored areas of the country. One way to do that? Through influencers and the promotion of those ”new”found gems. Do you think it will work?
but in fact, Western tourists only make about 14% of the toursists in Japan, the rest being from other Asian countries. So, yeah, hold your horses before releasing them toward the Westerns (not that a lot of us wouldn’t deserve it, though)
One point I wanted to highlight here, is that when we talking about overtourism, and of #tourists being disrespectful in Asian countries, lots of people automatically think of Western tourists,
.
In this case, we’re talking about Fujiyoshida, a small city at the base of Mt. Fuji, but the #overcrowding caused by tourists has been a problem in other cities in Japan as well.
Things that are… pretty hard to ignore. But centuries of opening the gates to tourism + soft power + Orientalism (the “unusual”, “different” perspective is very attractive, isn’t it?) can’t be be ignored in order to blame the individual.
We can clearly see the article using Blame theory, as if it’s the tourists fault, especially when we see things like “It took a decade of noise, trash and at least one tourist defecating on a resident’s lawn for the town of Fujiyoshida to declare a crisis.”
It might sound a little over the edge to cancel an anual #CherryBlossom festival due to the overcrowding caused by tourists, but that’s exactly what this city in Japan did.
Today the hot topic is #Overturism , but specifically, intuitions in #Japan
Koreans see themselves as somewhere in the middle — ideally closer to the top — and take pride in that position," for example.
In this article, sociology professor Park Kyung-tae brings some important points, like "Korean-style racism internalizes Western racial hierarchies, where white people are at the top and Black people are at the bottom. +
This, together with a westernized view of skin color, and racial and economical hierarchies, also contributes for xenophobia in Korea, especially when it comes to southeast #asians #SEAbling
But a deeper dive into the subject will show us that there’s much more to it. In fact, the xenophobia is different depending on what kind of foreigner you are. Koreans take pride in being an ‘homogeneous society’.
I think most foreigners here, especially westerns - like me -, try their best to be very understanding toward the Korean #discrimination, justifying it in the fact Korea has only started seeing foreigners recently.
I think one of the most surprising things for me was how #Koreans are blind to their own xenophobia, in a way that they think it is not a thing in Korea - let alone an issue.
This article talks about the many different points and “reasons” for #xenophobia in South Korea.
“A large gender wage gap, long hours, and inflexible working practices are all remnants of a different time when men were fully committed breadwinners and women were fully committed housewives. These structures make it difficult to combine career and motherhood,” and I thnk it sums it up prtty well.
Why I think this article is most worth the read is the fact that Jon seamlessly links the societal problems I mentioned with the financial ones, as he write things like,
Pareliussen mentions that in most countries lower birth rates come from young people having better access to birth control and “increased freedom”, but that that is not exactly the case in Korea.
“Men specialising as breadwinners and women as home-keepers thus represents a huge welfare loss for both genders and a misallocation of human capital.”
In this column, author Jon Pareliussen briefly brings on the nonsense people who have the “tendency to brand this as a women’s issue” — which he disagrees with, saying, among other things, that
And this is where I think this is an important article.