“Comfort women’s remarks” Ramsey “I don’t have a prostitution contract…I made a mistake” to a colleague (2nd report)

Mark Ramsayer, a law school professor at Harvard University in the United States, who caused a stir with a dissertation that defined Japanese comfort women as voluntary prostitutes, revealed to a fellow professor that there was no contract written by Korean comfort women victims.

Professor Ramsey belatedly admitted that he incorrectly cited the case of comfort women in his thesis. As a result, attention is paid to whether this ripple, triggered by the publication of the thesis, will face a new phase.

Prof. Ramsayer said in a post entitled’Searching for the Truth of the Comfort Women’ published on the 26th (local time) in the US current affairs weekly New Yorker, a Korean-born Suk Ji-young, professor at Harvard University Law School The e-mails exchanged with me and the contents of the direct conversation were disclosed.

Professor Seok said in a conversation that Professor Ramsey had with him, “I do not have a contract made by a Korean comfort woman.”

Previously, Professor Ramsey defined the comfort women issue as a contract act between a’prostitute’ and a’preliminary prostitute’ through his thesis’Sexual Contract in the Pacific War’.

However, it has been pointed out in academia that he was unable to present the contracts written by Korean comfort women victims even after mentioning the contract issue.

Instead, Professor Ramsey further explained to Professor Seok that he was based on a 1991 treatise on employment contracts for prostitution in Japan before the war. However, Prof. Seok refuted, “Prostitution before the war does not deal with sex labor on the front line during World War II or the Korean comfort women issue.”

In a conversation with Professor Seok, Professor Ramsey admitted, “I thought it would be good to secure a contract for a Korean woman, but I couldn’t find it,” he said, and “I’m sure you won’t find it.

When historians found other testimonies in the literature cited by Professor Ramsay that contradicted his argument, it was also revealed that Professor Ramzier stepped back, claiming that he erroneously cited the case of a 10-year-old Japanese girl.

Ramsayer’s testimony from a 10-year-old Japanese girl named’Osaki’ appeared in his thesis, claiming that the contract was voluntary and legal.

In his thesis, he wrote, “When Osaki was 10 years old, the comfort women recruitment book offered an advance payment of 300 yen.” “Osaki knew what it entails, so the recruitment book did not even try to trick him.”

However, Amy Stanley, a professor at Northwestern University in the United States, has refuted that the application cited by Professor Ramsey actually testified that “we didn’t know this was a job. It was incredibly terrible.”

Professor Ramzier admitted to Professor Seok via email, saying, “I don’t know what happened, but I made a mistake,” saying, “I’m puzzled and troubled,” after seeing these refutations.

Professor Ramsey sent an e-mail to Professor Seok, indicating that there were many people who supported him in Korea, Japan and elsewhere.

He also sent a statement to Professor Seok that 15 Koreans, including four co-authors of’Anti-Japanese Tribalism’, described the controversy as a “witch hunt” against Professor Ramsey.

However, Professor Seok said that two American scholars who initially defended Ramsay changed their positions after reading the materials pointing out the flaws in the thesis.

Mary Elizabeth, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, initially assessed Professor Ramsey’s research as “exorbitant”, but in a later post to Professor Seok, “Ramzier must thoroughly answer the refutation position and admit the mistake.” Professor Seok said.

Columbia University professor David Weinstein also insisted that Ramzier’s thesis should be published in the journal’s International Legal and Economic Review (IRLE), but read the arguments of historians’ refutation, saying, “The editors were able to capture the serious errors of the underlying facts in the review process. If we judge that it failed, it would be appropriate to withdraw the publication.”

Professor Seok pointed out that “a strong consensus has been formed that academic freedom must accompany the responsibility to present proper evidence.”

Just because Professor Ramsey admitted some errors in his thesis, it is unclear whether he would directly withdraw or make a major correction.

According to Professor Seok’s New Yorker article, Professor Ramsey wrote the thesis in question under the premise of’contract relations’ even though he knew that he could not find a contract for a Korean comfort woman victim.

Even when he responded to the case of a 10-year-old Japanese victim who completely distorted the context, he only responded with “a mistake” and sent an article in support of him to Professor Seok.

Professor Ramsey said in an e-mail conversation with Yonhap News TV on the 17th that he will maintain his thesis position.

[연합뉴스]

Copyrights ⓒ Yonhap News. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited