Wooyoun Lee

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor*
Wooyoun Lee**

Abstract
For about three months in early 2021, people in South Korea were slandering J. Mark
Ramseyer, an American scholar. The journal International Review of Law and Economics,(Vol. 65, March 2021) was due to publish Ramseyerʼs paper “Contracting for Sex in the
Pacific War,” which had been uploaded in December 2020. In the paper, Ramseyer argued:
1) That the relationship between the owner of a “comfort station” and a “comfort woman”
was a contractual relationship, no different from the relationship between a brothel owner
and a prostitute before World War II, and 2) That the treatment of comfort women inwartime was better than the treatment generally accorded to prostitutes before the war. The
violent condemnation of Ramseyer shows that the comfort women issue remains the mostpowerful stronghold of what has been called “anti-Japanese tribalism” in Korea. Their attack
on him was not academic criticism, but an expression of anger and hostility―qualities thatare common to all tribalism. The president of Harvard University has defended Ramseyer
on grounds of academic freedom, and Ramseyerʼs paper remains accessible online. Thisepisode has become the first case in which anti-Japanese tribalism in Korea has failed in its
attempt to attack Japan and its allies by brandishing the comfort women issue. In this essay,
I will introduce Ramseyerʼs paper, rebut major criticisms of his work, and put forward myown arguments.

I. Introduction

For about three months in early 2021, people in South Korea were slandering J.
Mark Ramseyer, an American scholar. The journal International Review of Law andEconomics, (Vol. 65, March 2021) was due to publish Ramseyerʼs paper “Contracting
for Sex in the Pacific War,”1 which had been uploaded in December 2020. In the paper,
Ramseyer argued: 1) That the relationship between the owner of a “comfort station” and a “comfort
woman” was a contractual relationship, no different from the relationship between a brothel*Parts of this paper have been previously published online as separate articles. They can be accessed
at: https://japan-for ward.com/bookmark-har vard-thesis-on-comfort-women-fortells-the-decline-ofanti-japan-tribalism/. https://japan-for ward.com/bookmark-har vard-professors-paper-on-comfortwomen-will-become-academias-pandoras-box/. https://japan-for ward.com/bookmark-controversyover-har vard-article-cant-erase-the-facts-of-comfort-women-contracts/. https://japan-for ward.com/
bookmark-the-substance-of-contracts-why-ramseyer-is-correct-about-korean-sex-workers.

** Wooyoun Lee is a researcher at Naksungdae Economic Research Institute in Seoul.
In this paper, Korean and Japanese names will be presented in the traditional Western order, with thesurname following the given name. For example, the authorʼs given name is “Wooyoun” and the familyname is “Lee.”
1

J. Mark Ramseyer, “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War,” International Review of Law and Economics
65 (March 2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2020.105971.

37
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor

owner and a prostitute before World War II, and 2) That the treatment of comfort women inwartime was better than the treatment generally accorded to prostitutes before the war.
The violent condemnation of Ramseyer shows that the comfort women issue remains themost powerful stronghold of what has been called “anti-Japanese tribalism” in Korea. Their attack
on him was not academic criticism, but an expression of anger and hostility―qualities that arecommon to all tribalism. After the furor subsided, scholars, mostly in the United States, began
to offer academic criticism. Their most important arguments were that: 1) Korean women were
forcibly taken as comfort women by the Japanese state, rather than voluntarily signing contracts,
and that 2) To show a contractual relationship, a written contract is necessary, but Ramseyer
failed to produce this evidence.
In Korea, any issue can be magnified into a great vortex that draws in other controversies, butthese flare-ups are also quick to disappear from peopleʼs minds. Since April, the Ramseyer issue
has disappeared from the radar of the media and faded from public attention. In the meantime, thepresident of Harvard University has defended Ramseyer on grounds of academic freedom, andRamseyerʼs paper remains accessible online. This episode has become the first case in which antiJapanese tribalism in Korea has failed in its attempt to attack Japan and its allies by brandishing
the comfort women issue. In this essay, I will introduce Ramseyerʼs paper, rebut major criticismsof his work, and put forward my own arguments.
In Section II, I provide an overview of how critics of Japan have reacted to Ramseyerʼs paper.
Section III discusses the academic contributions made by Ramseyerʼs work. In Section IV, I offer
rebuttals to Ramseyerʼs critics. Section V explains the miuri contracts through which women soldthemselves and discusses how prostitutes with prior experience were recruited into the comfort
stations. Section VI summarizes the discussion.

II. Anti-Japanese Slanders against Ramseyer’s Paper

Since January 28, South Korean media have been energetically carrying reports on Ramseyerʼs
paper, with many news organizations alleging that he had depicted comfort women as prostitutes.
Korean society was whipped up into a fury of outrage.
For example, MBC, a national television network, did not hesitate to convey Koreansʼ angry
responses, which included racist attacks accusing Ramseyer of being a “white Japanese.” He waslabeled a “pro-Japanese collaborator” and a “spokesman for Mitsubishi,” which some Koreansbelieve is a corporation that committed war crimes. This kind of reporting reflects the saying“If you canʼt refute the message, kill the messenger.” A ludicrous situation developed in which awhirlpool of anti-Japanese sentiment swallowed up other issues.
Most Korean journalists did not even read Ramseyerʼs paper, or if they did, they did notunderstand it. The former is more likely. Early media reports on the issue tended to follow moreor less the same script: much of the media essentially copied and pasted reports from the Yonhap
News Agency. This isnʼt particularly surprising. Indeed, it is the norm in Korean journalism.
Perhaps I am foolish to expect reporters to read Ramseyerʼs paper for themselves. Anyone
wishing to offer solutions to the problem of comfort women may first have to give lessons to
Korean newspaper reporters.
According to Ramseyerʼs paper, the contracts between comfort women and comfort station
owners were basically indentured servitude contracts. This is the first point of Ramseyerʼs article.
Critics may argue that Ramseyer assumes that the women signed contracts voluntarily, when in
reality, Korean women were forcibly taken by the Japanese. But anyone wanting to make such anargument would need to present relevant evidence by showing proof of “forcible recruitment.”
However, there is no evidence that forcible recruitment took place. It has been 30 years since
the comfort women issue and the theory of forcible recruitment came to light, but not a shredof objective evidence has been found to support the theory that the women were taken by the38
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Wooyoun Lee

Japanese state.
The only thing that anti-Japanese critics in South Korea present as evidence to support their
theory is the testimony of former comfort women who claim that they were forcibly taken by
the Japanese military or police. However, it is difficult to trust this kind of testimony. Someone
like Ramseyer who is not from Korea or Japan, and who is better positioned to view the matter
objectively, would also probably agree that the testimony cannot be fully trusted.
One of the most prominent of the former prostitutes is Yongsoo Lee, who has worked toattack Japan through the issue of comfort women. She seems to think of herself as a hero of theanti-Japanese movement who struggled for national independence. But her testimony should not
be allowed to pass as evidence. The same is true of much of the testimony given by other comfort
women, as well as the activists and researchers who supported them. Not being able to criticize
the contracts, they had no choice but criticize the messenger.
Ramseyerʼs argument is actually a historically objective fact: brothel owners did pay cash
advances. To refute this, it would be enough to provide evidence that this was not the case. The
same goes for the argument that comfort women became free and returned to Chosen (theKorean peninsula) when they had paid off their advances, or when they had completed theircontracts. All critics need to do is to present evidence that says otherwise. However, anti-Japanesecritics have not been able to do that, because such evidence does not exist. They couldnʼt evenfind errors or leaps of logic in this paper. All they could do is to disparage the messenger.
Those who have claimed that Ramseyer argues that comfort women were not sex slaves but
prostitutes fail to understand the point of his paper and are misguided in their criticism. Ramseyer
is not even the first person to talk about contracts, the existence of which is a well-known fact
among historians who have studied the comfort women issue.
His article doesnʼt even mention the expression “sex slave.” If you look at the details of thecontracts discussed in his paper, youʼll see that although the paper was not written to provethat comfort women were prostitutes, the contracts could be used to support the argument that
comfort women were not sex slaves. It is this position that anti-Japanese critics wanted to criticize.
But they couldnʼt find the historical and objective data to refute the argument of the paper andcouldnʼt even clarify their own logic about the problem.
Another reason they are making a fuss about Ramseyerʼs paper has to do with a recent scandal
about the malfeasance of Meehyang Yoon. Yoon is a member of Koreaʼs National Assembly andwas the representative of Jeongdaehyeob the most powerful anti-Japanese activist organization
dealing with the comfort women issue. The comfort women movement was on the verge of losing
its leading position in the anti-Japanese movement in Korea because of the scandal, and national
trust in Jeongdaehyeob dropped dramatically.
In addition, Younghoon Rhee, a former professor at Seoul National University, presented
convincing new data and explanations about comfort women in his books Baniljongjokjuuiwaui(Anti-Japanese tribalism) and Baniljongjokjuuiwaui tujaeng (Struggle against anti-Japanesetribalism),2 which caused a stir in Korean society. According to Rhee, comfort women shouldnʼt
be regarded as “sex slaves.” Those on the other side, including anti-Japanese researchers andactivists, did not know how to refute the arguments put forward in these books either.
The critics were therefore on the lookout for a pretext to fight back. When the Sankei
Shimbun newspaper carried a report on Ramseyerʼs work, they seized the opportunity. They
staged ad hominem attacks and strived to whip up anti-Japanese sentiment. As a result, most
Koreans who did not know much about what was going on came to believe that the issue wasa major controversy in the United States and Japan. However, Japanese media have been quiet
2

Younghoon Rhee et al, Baniljongjokjuuiwaui [Anti-Japanese tribalism] (Seoul: Miraesa, 2019);
Younghoon Rhee et al, Baniljongjokjuuiwaui tujaeng [Struggle against anti-Japanese tribalism] (Seoul:
Miraesa, 2020).

39
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor

about the paper. In the United States, there were only a few scattered complaints voiced bysome students and scholars. Lawrence S. Bacow, the president of Harvard University, defendedRamseyer and his paper in the name of academic freedom, and International Review of Law andEconomics continues to post the Ramseyer article online with an “Expression of Concern.”
Perhaps some anti-Japanese critics might interpret this small-scale commotion in Japan andthe United States as a great victory. But internationally, the incident marked their first failure in
their attempts to attack Japan using the comfort women issue.

III. Ramseyer’s Arguments

Academic articles start with an abstract and three to five keywords. In Ramseyerʼs article, thekeywords are “prostitution” and “indentured servitude.” In the economic history of Japan, it iswell-known that female employees who worked at inns, restaurants, and brothels from the Edo
period on were generally indentured laborers. They received a lump sum in advance―an amountthat they couldnʼt dream of in ordinary circumstances―and in exchange, they worked for several
years at their jobs. They received wages and gradually repaid the advance from their salaries.

A. Indentured Ser vitude Contracts
Some of the most well-known indentured laborers are the workers who immigrated to America
from Europe in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. They were required to pay for theirpassage and food, which were costly for poor European workers. Essentially, employers in
America paid for their travel expenses, and when the laborers arrived in America, they worked
for their employers for about seven years on average.
Ramseyer identifies as indentured ser vitude contracts the agreements between brothel
owners and prostitutes that were entered into before the Asia-Pacific War, as well as theagreements between comfort station owners and comfort women that were entered into during
the conflict. Before comfort women began their work, brothel owners loaned large sums ofmoney known as zenshakukin to prostitutes or their parents, and the women would pay off theadvance over several years. The money that women earned from their customers, namely the
gyokudai (sales), was split between the owner and the women according to a certain ratio, and thewomen used the gyokuwari (the portion of the money that belonged to the women) to pay backpart of the advance they had received. In this contract, the woman is both the sales item and theseller at the same time, and she was typically the daughter of a poor farmer. The buyer was thebrothel owner, and the womanʼs parents (mostly her father) became the joint borrower of theadvance.
As with all good articles, Ramseyerʼs idea is simple. He first asks, “Why do contracts in theprostitution industry take this particular form?” Ordinary laborers first work and get paid later.
So why is it that prostitutes and comfort women entered into a different type of contract, whosecharacteristics include a multi-year contract period, upfront advances, and shared earnings?
The answer is also simple. A woman who gets an offer to work as a prostitute faces a problem.
She worries that working in prostitution will be fatal to her reputation. To compensate for this, thebrothel owner offers very favorable conditions. But she cannot be sure whether he will keep his
promise. How do you solve this problem? The brothel owner pays her a large amount of money inadvance, known as zenshakukin.
The brothel owner also faces a problem. The nature of the industry makes it impossible tomonitor whether his employees are working hard, since their labor takes place in a closed space.
The owner asks himself, “I pay them generously, but will they work as they are supposed to? Will
clients leave satisfied and come back to look for the same woman again?” The owner solves thisproblem by splitting the money earned from the sex services between himself and the women,
according to a pre-agreed ratio. This will incentivize the women to do their best at their job, while
40
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Wooyoun Lee

a regular salary would only discourage them from working hard. This is another of the points ofRamseyerʼs article.
The framework of Ramseyerʼs analysis is game theory. According to game theory, the best
way to get someone to believe my promise is to demonstrate that keeping the promise is in mybest interests. Keeping the promise of paying high wages benefits the brothel owner because
it allows the prostitute to repay her advance quicker. Prostitutes are motivated to work hardby the terms of their contracts, by which they share the income from their sex services with
their employers at a certain rate. By agreeing on this share of the proceeds from her “sales,” aprostitute demonstrates to the brothel owner that it is in her best interests to keep her promise
to work hard. Both sides believe each otherʼs promises, and the indentured servitude contract as
described above becomes reality.

B. Improvements in the Working Conditions of Comfort Women

In all societies, sex work is known to be arduous and severely damaging to a sex workerʼs
reputation. In return, sex workers earn high incomes. The same was true of the prostitutes who
worked in Japanese brothels before the Asia-Pacific War and of the militar y comfort women
during the conflict. According to Ramseyer, improvements in the treatment of comfort women
can be seen in the contracts they signed with the owners of the comfort stations. The betterworking conditions came about because comfort women were working in a dangerous war zone.
Several factors motivated brothel owners to provide more favorable conditions for comfort
women in wartime. First, a comfort woman had to take the risk of being killed or injured in abattle zone, unlike someone working in the interior of Japan and Chosen. Second, if the brothel
owner violated the contract, she faced the risk of having fewer means to get herself out of her
predicament. Prostitutes in Tokyo or Seoul could turn to their friends, the police, or courts for
help, or simply disappear into the city crowds, if need be. Comfort women working in a foreign
war zone did not have this choice.
This high level of risk needed to be compensated by correspondingly high pay. A similar
pattern is found in the wartime labor mobilization (including conscription) of men in colonial-era
Korea, which took place after September 1939. In the 1920s and 30s, wages for Koreans working
in Japan were just over half of the wages paid to Japanese. However, after the mobilization
began, wage differentials due to non-economic reasons, such as ethnic discrimination, becamealmost nonexistent, though pay did vary based on individual ability. This is because the Japanese
government, facing labor shortages, banned discrimination. Ironically, during the war, working
conditions for Korean workers became much better.3
According to Ramseyer, in the mid-1920s, advances for prostitutes in Japan were about 1,000
to 1,200 yen. In those days, the daily wage of a typical female factor y worker was less than
1.5 yen.4 In addition, unlike female factory workers, prostitutes were provided with meals andhousing. In an environment characterized by a low level of economic development and a highEngelʼs coefficient, the provision of meals and housing further widened the wage gap between
prostitutes and other occupations. Given these circumstances, advances paid to comfort womenmight have been more than 1,000 times greater than the daily wage of female factory workers.
Ramseyer argued that even after the start of the war, there was no significant change in thesize of the advances. Rather, the indenture period was reduced. In the case of prostitutes, thecommon contract period was six years in Japan and three years in Korea, while it was two years
3

Woo-youn Lee, “Korean Coal and Metal Mineworkers Mobilized in Wartime Japan: The Question ofWages and Ethnicity,” Japan Review 1, no. 3 (2018): 26–59.

4

Naknyeon Kim, “Jeonjeon (1900–39) Ilbonui Siljirimgeumgwa Imgeumgyeokcha” [Real wages and wage
differentials in Japan], Geongjebaljeonyeongu 2 (2011): 141–170.

41
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor

for those in comfort stations for military personnel. There were also cases where contracts were
for just six to twelve months, as was the case for comfort women in Burma. Military comfort
women could also leave the comfort station when the contract period was over, regardless ofwhether their advances had been paid off in full or not. This shortened indenture period would
make it easier for them to return home.5
The division of the earnings also became more favorable to women, according to Ramseyer.
If the earnings were shared in a ratio of 7:3 for ordinary prostitutes, it became 6:4 for comfort
women. In some cases, a 4:6 ratio was adopted, whereby the comfort women got to keep morethan the brothel owner. As a result, there were comfort women who returned home after paying
off their advances in just a few months.6 I would add that the number of soldiers ser viced
by comfort women was generally higher than the number of ordinar y citizens ser viced byprostitutes, so the income of military comfort women was significantly higher.
In 1925, prostitutes in the brothels of Tokyo ser viced an average of 2.5 people per day.
However, on the military front, there was always a shortage of comfort women. The Japanesemilitar y also imposed strict hygiene practices to prevent sexually transmitted diseases andrequired the use of condoms. The military prohibited public access to comfort stations, whileforbidding soldiers from visiting other private brothels. These policies meant that the comfort
women had better health and higher incomes than other prostitutes. Some people claim thatafter the end of the war, comfort women were not able to collect the wages they were owed fromthe military. But it is likely that such cases were exceptional. There would have been far more
comfort women who returned home before the end of the war, and most comfort women would
have been spared from the disorder right after the end of hostilities. In conclusion, comfort
women faced higher risks but earned higher incomes compared to pre-war prostitutes.

IV. Criticisms of Ramseyer’s Paper and Rebuttals to Ramseyer’s Critics
A. Korean Recruiters vs. the Japanese State
After launching ad hominem attacks against Ramseyer, the Korean media reported criticisms
about the contents of his paper by conveying the opinions of a number of researchers in the fields
of Korean and Japanese history.
The researchers first criticized Ramseyerʼs insistence that the responsibility of Korean
recruiters was greater than that of the Japanese state. The critics denounced this passage in his
paper:
It was not that the government―either the Korean or the Japanese government ―forced
women into prostitution. It was not that the Japanese army worked with fraudulent recruiters.
It was not even that recruiters focused on the armyʼs comfort stations. Instead, the problem
involved domestic Korean recruiters who had been tricking young women into working at
brothels for decades.
Of course, Korean recruiters were responsible. The Japanese government and military werewary of recruiting comfort women through employment fraud and human trafficking because
5

People usually assume that the comfort women were able to return home only after the end of the war.
But this line of thinking is heavily influenced by the argument that women were forcibly recruited andthat they were sex slaves. From 1937 to 1945, when the comfort stations were operating at their full
extent, many comfort women would have returned to their home country even before the end of thewar. Those who were still working until the end of hostilities would have been a minority.

6

Profit-sharing ratios are discussed by Ikuhiko Hata. See Ikuhiko Hata, Comfort Women and Sex in the
Battle Zone, trans. Jason Michael Morgan (Lanham: Hamilton Books, 2018), 99.

42Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Wooyoun Lee

this could damage Japanʼs reputation. Because of this, the Japanese military and the GovernmentGeneral of Chosen tried to crack down on such recruiters. Still, it is true that the Japanese
government and military were involved in the establishment and operation of comfort stations.
Is this Japanʼs fault? Yes. People and governments everywhere make mistakes. But this is where
historical comparisons would be useful.
The United States, with its strong Puritan tradition, is famous for its dualistic attitude toward
sex in war zones. Since 1941, the U.S. has officially maintained the principle that “soldiers are
not allowed to contact prostitutes in any area.” After venereal diseases became a problem due tosoldiersʼ contacts with local prostitutes, in 1942, the Surgeon General of the Army sent 150,000
boxes of condoms and 310,000 cases of disinfectant to the front.7
During the Vietnam War, the largest war fought by the United States since World War II,
the United States took a more realistic stance. For example, there were two buildings housing“recreation centers” at the U.S. militar y camp in Lai Khe, where 60 Vietnamese women had
room and board. They worked in 60 private rooms. The sales were split in a 6:4 ratio between the
proprietor and the women. Army medics checked the women every week for venereal disease,
and women who passed their medical exams got a sign on their door that said they were safe.
Places such as this, which were called “Disneylands,” were supervised by brigade commanders,and even the Pentagon turned a blind eye to them. Doesnʼt this sound familiar? Indeed, thisreminds us of Japanese comfort stations.8
In World War II, Germany also had comfort stations very similar to those of Japan, with about
500 comfort stations in place in 1942. In the same year, the number of Japanese comfort stations
was about 400.9
Ramseyer describes the relationship between comfort women and owners of comfort stationas contractual. The key point in researchersʼ criticisms of his paper was that he failed to present
contracts―that is, literal “sheets of paper” with the terms of the contracts. According to law
textbooks, a contract is an agreement, and the contract sheet is only proof of the contract. Critics
do not seem to consider that the present issue in question concerns not the written contract but
the contract itself.
In part, these criticisms may have arisen from an insufficient understanding of the cultural
dif ferences between the West and Korea. While the West had a culture of documenting
agreements in writing, people in Chosen relied heavily on oral contracts.

B. Forcible Recruitment and Kidnapping-Trafficking

The critics of Ramseyerʼs paper argued that since there were no written contracts, no contracts
were agreed to at all. They have their own reasons for arguing in this way. They believe that
Korean women did not become comfor t women based on contracts, but through forcible
recruitment by Japanese soldiers, police, and officials. “How can we talk about contracts when
women were recruited forcibly against their will?” is the question they will usually ask.
The critics believe there is an abundance of evidence that supports their positions. There

7

Hata, Comfort Women and Sex, 130–131.

8

Hata, Comfort Women and Sex, 238–239.

9Hata, Comfort Women and Sex, 121.

43
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor

are “testimonies” of former comfort women who are “victims.”10 As a defendant, Seiji Yoshidaconfessed his “war crimes” for himself.11 Japanese militar y documents were “discovered” by
Yoshiaki Yoshimi in 1992.12 The Kono Statement of 1993 expressed the Japanese governmentʼs
13“ apology. ” Repor ts by international organizations, such as the International Commissionof Jurists (ICJ) and Amnesty International, agreed that Japan had carried out the forcible
recruitment of Koreans. The United Nations Human Rights Commission adopted the so-called
Coomaraswamy Report in 1996.14
However, contrary to the belief of the critics, the only “evidence” that has survived is thetestimony of comfort women. The rest of the so-called evidence is either fictional, a mere
expression of personal views, or relies on comfort womenʼs testimonies.
Reports released by international organizations, for example, the Coomaraswamy Report, arebased on the testimony of comfort women and that of Seiji Yoshida, documents of the Japanesemilitary, and the Kono Statement. The Japanese government released the Kono Statement underpressure in circumstances in which almost everyone believed that testimonies of victims andperpetrators existed, as well as military documents to back up the statements.15 Since 1992, it has
been proven that the military documents that were found were in fact irrelevant to the claim offorcible recruitment.16 No additional documents have since been found.
Furthermore, Seiji Yoshidaʼs My war crimes turned out to be a work of fiction.17 As a result,the Asahi Shimbun newspaper had to retract 12 articles that were based on Yoshidaʼs statements―a distressing stepdown for a newspaper with one of the largest circulations in Japan. Although
there might seem to be an abundance of evidence, therefore, the reality is that practically every
piece of evidence has been refuted, and the only evidence that remains is the testimony of
comfort women.
The remaining question then is whether the claims of “forcible recruitment” by former
comfort women are credible. Most of their testimonies in the early 1990s, when the women firstcame forward, had nothing to do with forcible recruitment. At the time, they testified that they
became comfort women through employment fraud committed by Korean recruiters, or through10

Jeongdaehyeob (Hanguk Jeongsindae Munje Daechaek Hyeobuihoe [Korean Council for Compensationfrom Japanese Militar y Sexual Slaver y Victims]) and Hanguk Jeongsindae Yeonguhoe [Korean
Research Association of Japanese Militar y Sexual Slaver y], Junggugeuro Kkeullyeogan Joseonin
Gunwianbudeul (1) [Korean Military Comfort Women hauled into China (1)] (Seoul: Hanul, 1995).
These are relatively early testimonies. Since then, there have been too many testimonies reported in the
media to list them all. Many comfort women changed their testimonies, for example, from “my father
sold me” to “Japanese soldiers forcibly took me to a comfort station.”

11

Seiji Yoshida, Watashi no senso hanzai: Chosenjin kyoseirenko [My war crimes: The forced removal of
Koreans] (Tokyo: Sanichi Shobo, 1983).

12

Hata, Comfort Women and Sex, 1–3.

13

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, “Statement by Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono on the Result of
the Study on the Issue of ʻComfort Women,ʼ” August 4, 1993. Accessible at: https://www.awf.or.jp/e6/
statement-02.html.

14

United Nations, Commission on Human Rights. “Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against
Women, Its Causes and Consequences, Ms. Radhika Coomaraswamy, in accordance with Commission
on Human Rights resolution 1994/45”; “Report on the Mission to the Democratic Peopleʼs Republicof Korea, the Republic of Korea and Japan on the Issue of Military Sexual Slavery in Wartime,” E/
CN.4/1996/53/Add.1. January 4, 1996. Available online at: https://www.awf.or.jp/pdf/h0004.pdf.

15

Tsutomu Nishioka, Yoku wakaru ianfu mondai [The comfort women issue―an easily understood
explanation] (Tokyo: Soshisha, 2012), 25–31.

16

Hata, Comfort Women and Sex, 1–5.

17

Hata, Comfort Women and Sex, 181–186.

44
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Wooyoun Lee

human trafficking that was tolerated by their parents.
But when the comfort women issue became a social, political, and diplomatic problem
between South Korea and Japan, they started to change their statements. They began to claimthat they were “forcibly recruited.” Their testimony became politically contaminated.
Letʼs take a look at an example. Yongsoo Lee, a former comfort woman, appeared on KBS
television on August 15, 1992. When the program host asked her how she became a comfort
woman, she answered as follows:
I was 16. I had no clothes, no food. Then someone gave me a dress and a pair of shoes, tellingme to come with him. So I followed him, excited, without thinking about anything else.
Here, she speaks of a typical kidnapping case involving a recruiter of a comfort station who
was evidently Korean.
However, on February 16, 2007, when she appeared as a witness at a hearing on Japanesemilitary comfort women in the United States House of Representatives, she spoke differently, andcontributed to the resolution condemning Japan.
Soldiers and the girl came in, held my shoulders like this, covered my mouth with one hand,
and the soldier stabbed me in the back with something. I got dragged away at night.
As can be seen here, the first problem with the testimony of comfort women is that theirstatements are inconsistent. However, the more important problem is that there is no objective
proof suppor ting their testimony. There are no of ficial documents that point to “ forcible
recruitment” by Japanese authorities. There are no records left by the families, relatives, orneighbors of these comfort women dated before 1992 that attest to the alleged abductions.
For that matter, there have been no verified statements after 1992 either. Jeongdaehyeob (theKorean Council for Compensation from Japanese Military Sexual Slavery Victims) should haveinvestigated the “forcible recruitment” of the women in their hometowns and announced theresults after 1992.18 But we do not know whether Jeongdaehyeob conducted such investigations,or whether the organization covered up the findings of any investigations, if indeed they werecarried out.19
According to news reports, a leading critic of Ramseyer, Alexis Dudden, a professor at the
University of Connecticut, argued, “If there is no documentation to support the claim, if there isno evidence, the claim is not true,” and called Ramseyerʼs arguments a “total fabrication.” In turn,I would like to ask Professor Dudden if she thinks the testimony of comfort women would passmuster by the same standard of evidence that she insists on.
If not through forcible recruitment, how did Korean women become comfort women? One
method was employment fraud, in which Korean recruiters pretended to offer good jobs (forexample, work at factories) to lure women. In such cases, contracts might have been unnecessary.
Upfront payments smaller than those in comfort women contracts may have been paid, andin others no payments may have been made. The recruiter then typically sold the woman to a18

Nevertheless, advocates of the forcible recruitment theory claim that 200,000 women were taken to
Japanese military comfort stations. Yet they have not been able to present a single piece of evidence for
their claims over the last 30 years.

19

Jeongdaehyeob has collected at least several billion won (several million dollars) in government grants
and private donations since around 1990. Meehyang Yoon, a sitting lawmaker in the National Assembly
and the former representative of Jeongdaehyeob, was prosecuted in September 2020 and was tried on
charges of accounting fraud while at Jeongdaehyeob. Because of this case, Jeongdaehyeob lost the trustof many people and the organization faced the greatest crisis in its history.

45
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor

recruiter or owner of a brothel in exchange for an advance. This chain of events constitutes illegal
human trafficking. Criminal acts that combine the kidnapping of a woman and human trafficking
are properly called acts of “kidnapping-trafficking.” Such crimes were subject to police crackdown
even before the war because thousands of Koreans were working as professional recruiters tocarry out kidnapping-trafficking―a situation that lasted until the end of the war.20
Someone who committed kidnapping-trafficking could be punished under Articles 224 to
228 of the Japanese Criminal Code. The Japanese Criminal Code became applicable to Chosen
through the 1912 Ordinance on Penal Matters in Korea (Chosen keijirei). Here are the relevant
provisions of the Criminal Code, specifying the crimes for which a person could be punished:
Article 224: A person who abducts or kidnaps a minor...
Article 225: A person who abducts or kidnaps someone for profit, lewd purposes or marriage...
Article 226: A person who abducts or kidnaps someone for the purpose of transporting theperson outside the empire...
Article 227: A person who trades someone for the purpose of transporting the person outside
the empire or transports the kidnapped or the traded outside the empire...
Article 228: A person who accepts or hides the kidnapped or the traded for the purpose ofaiding the person who commits the preceding three crimes...
When women travelled from Korea to a comfort station in foreign territor y, they needed
several official documents. Firstly, any traveler from Korea going to places such as China orSoutheast Asia needed to have an identification card issued by a police chief in Korea, for which
the purpose of the trip needed to be made clear.
The procedure was much more complicated and difficult for prospective comfort women. The
items that were required to be submitted included:-A job application form filled out by the woman and the brothel owner, called the “temporary
hostess employment permission form”-Two photos-A job approval letter signed by the woman and the head of her family-Seal certificates of the related parties-A copy of the womanʼs family register.21
The job approval letter, seal certificates, and family register copy could only be obtainedor completed by the woman or her parents. In addition, an investigative report by a Japanese
consulate official confirming the womanʼs will to work as a comfort woman was required. In thecase of illegal recruitment, preparing these documents would have been difficult and expensive,
even if they were forged.
Furthermore, the owner of a comfort station could face problems even after the woman
arrived at the comfort station. The military units in charge of monitoring the stations carriedout checks to see whether each comfort woman was fully aware of what her job entailed. In fact,
there were cases in which the military sent women back home after learning that they had been
deceived into coming to work at comfort stations.
20

Rhee et. al., Baniljongjokjuui, 286, 298.

21

Naimusho Keihokyoku, “Shina toko fujo ni kansuru ken ukagai” [Inquir y into women traveling to
China], November 4, 1938.

46
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Wooyoun Lee

The Hankou brothel, the largest in China affiliated with the Japanese military and one of
the most thoroughly documented, was super vised by the Comfor t Depar tment within thelogistics headquarters of Japanʼs 11th Army. Seikichi Yamada came there as a comfort clerk in
February 1943 and left detailed records of the comfort station. Yamada also described in detailthe procedures for registering a new comfort woman. Upon arrival, a photo, family registr y,
written oath, and identity documents issued to her by local authorities were to be submitted to
the Comfort Department. Based on the items, an investigation was carried out into aspects of thewomanʼs history such as past jobs held, parentsʼ address and occupations, family make-up, andamounts of cash advances. When asked by comfort clerks, “Itʼs very difficult work to do, can you
bear it?” most new hires answered that they fully understood the situation. The women seemed tohave been well briefed by recruiters or brothel owners about what the job would entail.
But there were also accidents. In 1944, 30 women led by two Koreans arrived at the Hankou
station. A woman cried and said, “I was promised that I would be working at a club for army
officers. I didnʼt know I would be here as a comfort woman.” Military officials ordered the station
owner not to employ her and had him find a suitable job for the woman. A military doctor who
witnessed the incident, recalled, “It seems a pimp of some kind used honeyed words to recruither.”22

C. “There is no written contract”
Numerous people have criticized Ramseyer for not having presented written contracts asevidence in his article.23 However, according to law textbooks, the essence of contracts is the“meeting of the minds,” and written contracts are only evidence of such an agreement.
As an example, let us take a look at the testimony given by a former comfort woman whichshows us that written contracts existed. The following testimony is from Junggugeuro Kkeullyeogan
Joseonin Gunwianbudeul (2) (Korean military comfort women hauled into China (2)). The person
who testified is Byungsook Hyun, a former comfort woman.24
22

Hata, Comfort Women and Sex, 76–78.

23

For some essays criticizing Ramseyerʼs work from a historical perspective, see the following. Alexis
Dudden, “The Abuse of History: A Brief Response to J. Mark Ramseyerʼs ʻContracting for Sexʼ”; Andrew
Gordon and Carter Eckert, “Statement”; Tessa Morris-Suzuki, “The ʻComfort Womenʼ Issue, Freedom of
Speech, and Academic Integrity: A Study Aid”; Amy Stanley, Hannah Shepherd, Sayaka Chatani, David
Ambaras and Chelsea Szendi Schieder, “ʻContracting for Sex in the Pacific Warʼ: The Case for Retraction
on Grounds of Academic Misconduct,” all of which are in The Asia-Pacific Journal 19, no. 5 (2021). The
articles are all available at https://apjjf.org/2021/5/ToC2.html.
Michael Chwe, who works as an economist in the United States, drafted an online statement criticizing
Ramseyerʼs paper. Chweʼs statement has been signed by economists around the world, especiallyin the United States, with 3,665 signatures as of September 14, 2021. The statement, Michael Chwe,et. al., “Letter by Concerned Economists Regarding ʻContracting for Sex in the Pacific War,ʼ in theInternational Review of Law and Economics,” is at: http://chwe.net/irle/letter/. A Frequently Asked
Questions supplement about the letter is available at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UMg_XL
MoS6J999LTghDhAwh3DZuFaB5KCoSkFGSITWc/edit
The following article criticizes Ramseyerʼs work from a legal perspective. Yong-Shik Lee, Natsu Taylor
Saito and Jonathan Todres, “The Fallacy of Contract in Sexual Slaver y: A Response to RamseyerʼsʻContracting for Sex in the Pacific War,ʼ” Michigan Journal of International Law 42, no. 2 (2021). You canread it at https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2108&context=mjil

24

Hanguk Jeongsindae Yeonguso [Korean Institute of Japanese Military Sexual Slavery], Junggugeuro
Kkeullyeogan Joseonin Gunwianbudeul (2) [Korean military comfort women hauled into China (2)](Seoul: Hanul, 2003), 284–288.

47
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor

Joonchul Bae (Questioner): Then you got paid money to go to the hostess bar?
Byungsook Hyun: I got paid 500 yen for the term of two years. I gave my mother and father
the 500 yen. Then, I thought if I just did nothing, I wouldnʼt be able to do anything for myfamily. I thought I would go to another place and get paid again and give the money to mymother and father. I did not live in the countryside anymore.
Hyun had already worked as a prostitute at a hostess bar. After her elder brother told her sheshould get married, she chose to make money instead. So she went to find a recruiter.
Byungsook Hyun: I went to find this guy, Park, and so I went to Pakchun to find him . WhenI go to this inn, I said, “I hear someone came to buy girls. Is he around?”They tell me, “Itʼs that inn over there. I heard someone came from China to buy girls, gocheck it out.”
So when I go, thereʼs a man sitting there. “Did you come to buy girls?”“Yes. But how can a maiden as small as you ?”I said, “Iʼve been to China to make some money.”
Joonchul Bae: But did you know what you would be doing in China when you went there?
Byungsook Hyun: Yes, I knew. I went knowingly.
Joonchul Bae: Did you know that you would have to receive a lot of Japanese soldiers, too?
Byungsook Hyun: Yes, I knew.
She knew ver y well what the man who “buys girls” was gathering women for. Next, shenegotiates the contract terms.
Joonchul Bae: Did you hear all about that from somewhere?
Byungsook Hyun: You hear these things around . I went looking for the right place. So when
I asked him if he would buy, he said he would.
So he asked me how much I would like.
When I said, “My mother and father are in difficulties, how much would you give me for theterm of three years?” he said, “Iʼll give you 2,000 yen.”
So I said, “If you give me 2,000 yen, thatʼs not even 1,000 per year. Give me 1,000 yen more.”
He said, “Sure, take 3,000 yen and go home and get consent from your mother and father.”In order to get a job as a comfort woman, a woman needed her parentsʼ approval. In thiscase, the father initially refused, but eventually gave his consent in the face of the womanʼs
48
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Wooyoun Lee

importuning. Of course, the father also knew what she would be doing:
Joonchul Bae: Ah, you got the seal?
Byungsook Hyun: Yes, of course, he said, “if you bring either your mother or father, I will give
you money.” He even asked me to get seals from my grandmother and grandfather. It was
tough then.
Joonchul Bae: How old were you then?
Byungsook Hyun: I was probably about 16, because I also worked at a bar for two years.
They said I should also get seals from my grandma and grandpa. I mean, thereʼs no way mygrandma and grandpa would give me their seals. So I beg my father, who trusts me: “Dad,thereʼs a guy who came to buy girls and heʼs offering this much, and Iʼll go far away to makemoney.” I wanted to see him live well. I just wanted him to be able to use money and eat
what he wanted “Dad, talk to him for me.”In this case, an upfront advance was only paid in the presence of a womanʼs parents. But inreturn, parents and grandparents needed to give their consent as well as their seals. If this is nota contract, then what is it? In the contract, parents even added a condition that their daughter
should not be sold to another place.
Byungsook Hyun: Father said, “If you insist, Iʼll talk to him for you.” So we put down mymotherʼs name and fatherʼs name and put their seals on them.
“But they tell me I need seals from grandma and grandpa, too. What should I do, dad?”“Then Iʼll write it.”
So my dad wrote it and put the seals of grandma and grandpa, then we got all the agreements.
My father said, “Since I sold my daughter to you, you canʼt sell her to someone else again.”
He answered, “That was the promise . Thatʼs up to you.

Then, it shall be that way. Letʼs go.”Her father said he would “write it,” and he actually wrote and stamped it. A contract was what
he wrote and stamped. That is how Hyun came to be a prostitute. At the first place she went to,she did not have many customers. She blamed it on her appearance. So she went to Fèngtiān,
China, again.
Byungsook Hyun: As for me, I couldnʼt get a single client over there. Iʼve got an ugly face.
Clients want pretty girls. Who would choose an ugly one? There are lots of girls there. About
20 to 30 women. They are all from Chosen.
To the son of the guy who bought me, I said, “If I stay here, I wonʼt be able to pay my debt.
Take me somewhere else.”“But in the contract, your father said I couldnʼt sell you to someone else.”

49
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor“If I consent to it myself, what is the problem?”“In that case, letʼs go to Fèngtiān. Letʼs go by the agency and if someone chooses you, Iʼll
receive that money.”“Do you want to receive interest?”“I wonʼt take any interest. Just make something of yourself and go back home.”
She talks about “my debt,” which is an advance in an indentured servitude contract. “Thatmoney ” was also a reference to the advance. The man reminds her that according to thecontract, her father had made it clear the owner couldnʼt sell her again to someone else. That is,
prohibitions on resale could be written into the contract. Here we can also observe the process bywhich contracts on prostitutes were resold. The bonds on the wage advance were transferred to
the new owner. In some cases interest was paid, and in others interest payments were forgiven.
The brothel or comfort station in Fèngtiān was used by both civilians and Japanese soldiers.
Joonchul Bae: Maʼam, what kind of clients came to the house?
Byungsook Hyun: Soldiers, ordinary individuals, many types of people came.
As she couldnʼt make money in Fèngtiān either, Hyun decided to follow the Japanese army
on her own and moved to Bengbu in Anhui Province. The owner of the comfort station there wasalso Korean.
Byungsook Hyun: I said I couldnʼt stay there. I was going to make money after all, and I would
follow the army and earn money in the countryside. So I got chosen in Fèngtiān again andcame to Bengbu.
Joonchul Bae: So at that time, your debt of 3,000 yen was transferred to the owner in Bengbu
then?
Byungsook Hyun: Yes.
Joonchul Bae: The owner in Bengbu was also Korean?
Byungsook Hyun: Yes. They were all Koreans.
She moved from somewhere in China to Fèngtiān, then to Bengbu. The first place she went toseems like an ordinary brothel, but there arenʼt many details about it. Her workplace in Fèngtiāncatered to both soldiers and civilians, and it seems that the place in Bengbu was a comfort station
exclusively for the Japanese military.
If the first place was an ordinary brothel, this would mean that it was quite simple for an
ordinary prostitute to become a military comfort woman. All it took was being “transferred” to a
new comfort station. Just like in the resale of prostitutes among brothel owners, the owner of thebrothel simply resold her to a military comfort station.
In the example discussed above, the former comfor t woman and her parents signed acontract. Her parents and grandparents signed, too. The contract terms included the negotiated50Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Wooyoun Lee

amount of the advance, the contract period, and the conditions for a resale.25
The example above concerns China and Manchuria, but other places were similar. The
Japanese occupation forces in Malaya had regulations about comfort stations with dozens of
extremely detailed clauses. The sixth clause read, “When an operator wishes to employ a woman,a written employment contract must be entered into, which must be approved by the regionalcommanding officer.”26 From the perspective of the Japanese militar y, comfort women were
important resources for preventing venereal disease, deterring sex crimes, and maintaining
morale. The Japanese military monitored owners of comfort stations to ensure that they compliedwith the contracts and worked to discourage them from exploiting the comfort women. The
prerequisite of such a system was the existence of written contracts.
In the face of this evidence, are critics still going to insist that contracts or written contracts
did not exist?

V. Where Did Comfort Women Come From?
A. Miuri
A miuri contract is a type of indentured ser vitude contract that was entered into between awomanʼs parents and the owner of a comfort station (or a recruiter acting on behalf of one ofthe parties) in the prostitution industr y. In Japanese, miuri literally means “body sale.” As acontract for the recruitment of women, in a miuri contract, the parents intentionally transferred
their daughter into prostitution. The operator of the house of prostitution, as the buyer, gave theparents a cash advance. The woman repaid the advance out of her salary, while working in theprostitution industry for a number of years during her contract. When she had repaid all of theadvance and the period came to an end, she regained her freedom. Instances of miuri were much
more frequent than “kidnapping-trafficking,” not to mention forcible recruitment. Miuri waslegal, but the latter practices were illegal. To my regret, Ramseyer didnʼt use the term miuri in his
paper. I donʼt know why.
When it comes to transactions concerning persons, it is a misunderstanding to think of miuri
as being the same as transactions involving slaves or Chosen “nobi,” through which a person,for example a young woman, was permanently transferred to the ownership of someone else.
Although miuri is a Japanese practice dating to the Tokugawa era, Koreans during the colonial
period equated miuri with “human trafficking,” so we should be careful about our terminology.
In Chosen, trading practices or concepts corresponding to miuri have not been found.
Japanese systems were implanted in Chosen around 1900, and took root during the colonial
period. Japan and Chosen shared similar social and legal backgrounds. In both countries,
womenʼs rights were weak, the rights of the patriarch were strong, and systems of licensed
prostitution were in place.
There are many cases in Chosen in which a daughter, a son, the head of a family, or a whole
25

Haksun Kim is famous for being one of the first persons to announce she had been a comfort woman.
In 1991, she testified, “My mom got 40 yen from my foster father and made me live in that house(Pyongyang, Chosen) with a contract for several years.” It is clear that there was a contract, but unclear
whether the contract was in writing. (Jeongdaehyeob and Hanguk Jeongsindae Yeonguso, Gangjero
Kkeullyeogan Joseonin Gunwianbudeul(1) [Forcibly Recruited Korean Military Comfort Women(1)](Seoul: Hanul, 1993), 34.) There may have been cases in which the persons concerned only entered into
oral contracts. But it is clear that these cases involved valid contracts. This is because when a woman
and her family entered into a contract in Korea, all of them were fully aware that she would be receiving
Japanese soldiers in China.

26

Hata, Comfort Women and Sex, 98.

51
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor

family were sold as nobi, a kind of slave. This custom is called jamae (meaning “selling oneself”).
Like other slaves and “nobi,” the social status of jamae nobi was legally inherited. Documents usedin transactions of nobi stereotypically used phrases such as “serving their owners until death”
or “selling themselves (or their families) forever,” which is an important difference from a miuri
contract. In Chosen, jamae trades were frequently carried out in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. The last contract for jamae was concluded in 1910.27
According to newspapers in colonial-era Korea, illegal human trafficking and miuri of young
women were commonplace and became serious social issues. In the mid-1930s, Japan went
through a similar situation. An important trigger behind the abortive coup of February 26, 1936,
was the abysmal situation faced by soldiers from rural areas, where financial conditions were sobad that their sisters were being sold into prostitution. A Korean comfort woman once said that
she hated her father more than the owner of the comfort station because her father had sold her.
From the parentsʼ point of view, the money given to them by recruiters of the comfort station
was the price they received in exchange for their daughter. But from the perspective of therecruiters, this money was an advance which they would get back. Transactions of young women
were at the boundar y between illegal human trafficking and legitimate miuri. Transactions
involving young women were so rampant as to become a social issue leading to investigations andprosecutions. But most of the persons suspected of illegally trafficking in women were found not
guilty by the authorities.
About 90 percent of the suspects arrested by police for abduction or kidnapping in colonial-era
Korea were sent to prosecutors. But only a few suspects were charged or tried. A total of 40,553
suspects were sent to prosecutors in 1924–1941, but only 2,506 were charged. From 1924 to 1943,
as many as 87.5 percent of those arrested by police were not prosecuted; 85 percent of those
tried were convicted and sentenced to prison. In short, only about 10 percent of those arrested
by police for abduction or kidnapping were tried and convicted.28 This shows that legitimate
miuri contracts were selected for use much more frequently than resorting to illegal kidnappingtrafficking.
At the same time, we can reasonably deduce that people who were signing miuri contracts
with recruiters or owners knew exactly what their daughters would do. Even in cases in which
there were no explicit written contracts, if parents knew the facts, their agreements wereindisputably contracts. Critics of Ramseyer seem to be unaware of or uninterested in these details
about Korean prostitution.

B. From Prostitute to Comfort Woman
The other important contracts signed between comfort women and recruiters or owners of
comfort stations would be the ones by which existing prostitutes in Chosen, China or elsewhere
were recruited. This aspect of recruiting is the one most neglected by researchers, but it may be
the most probable route through which someone became a comfort woman. There were about
10,000 Korean prostitutes in Chosen, according to one count by the Government-General. In
addition, there were about 8,000 Korean prostitutes in areas where Korean people had a presence,such as in China and Manchuria, which became war zones.
These are the numbers of licensed prostitutes who were identified and permitted to work by
government agencies. There may have been more unlicensed prostitutes than licensed ones.
27

Jaeho Kim, “Jamaenobiwa Ingane Daehan Jaesangwon 1750–1905” [Jamae slave and property rights tohuman beings], Gyeongjesahag 38 (2005): 3–39; Wooyoun Lee and Myongsoo Cha, “Joseon Hugi Nobi
Gagyeogui Gujowa Sujun, 1678–1889” [Structure and levels of slave prices in late Chosen Korea, 1678–
1889], Gyeongjehag Yongu 58, no. 4, (2010): 99–132.

28

Younghoon Rhee et al., Baniljongjokjuuiwaui tujaeng [Struggle against anti-Japanese tribalism] (Seoul:
Miraesa, 2020), 41–42.

52
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Wooyoun Lee

Even in the center of Seoul, there were several famous districts of unlicensed brothels. What wasneeded to convince these prostitutes to start working as comfort women was to inform them that
their new jobs would be accompanied by higher risk, but would allow them a higher income thantheir current jobs.
From the recruiterʼs point of view, hiring existing prostitutes meant that he did not have totake the risks that accompanied kidnapping-trafficking, not to mention “forcible recruitment.”
From the prostituteʼs point of view, becoming a military comfort woman did not further impair
her social reputation. Many women took pride in being able to comfort soldiers. Japanesemilitar y officers and soldiers were not in a position to question where comfort woman camefrom, and they generally did not raise such questions. With these factors in mind, the first targetof recruiters or comfort station owners would be existing prostitutes from Chosen and othercountries.
In 1984, before the issue of comfort women became politicized, Gunho Song described how
prostitutes were recruited. Song, who served as the president of the Hankyoreh newspaper, themost left-wing and anti-Japanese media organization in Korea, was born in 1927 and grew up incolonial-era Korea. The following is a passage from his book Nittei shihaika no Kankoku gendaishi(Modern Korean history under Japanese rule).
After the invasion of Nanjing at the end of 1937, around the beginning of the operation for
Xuzhou, the Japanese authorities instructed brokers in Chosen to transfer to China many
women who were working as prostitutes due to poverty. Placing them in Japanese militaryfacilities called “comfort stations,” “temporary comfort stations,” or “army recreation centers,”
they made them into playthings of Japanese soldiers.29
There exists testimony that describes the circumstances of how comfor t women wererecruited. It is found in the U.S. militaryʼs records of an interrogation of three Korean civilian
workers who had been working for the Japanese navy before being captured as prisoners of war
in 1944. The questions in the records:
Do Koreans generally know about the recruitment of Korean girls by the Japanese Army toserve as prostitutes?
What is the attitude of the average Korean toward this program? Does the PoW [prisoner ofwar] know of any disturbance or friction which has grown out of this program?
The answers were as follows:
All Korean prostitutes that the PoWs have seen in the Pacific War were volunteers or had
been sold by their parents into prostitution.
This is proper in the Korean way of thinking but direct conscription of women by the Japanese
would be an outrage that the old and young folks alike would not tolerate. Men would rise up
in rage, killing Japanese no matter what consequences they might suffer.30
29

Gunho Song, Nittei shihaika no Kankoku gendaishi [Modern Korean history under Japanese rule],trans. Chanho Pak (Tokyo: Futosha, 1984), 345–346.

30

U.S. War Depar tment, Militar y Intelligence Ser vice, Captured Personnel and Material Branch,“Composite Repor t on Three Korean Navy Civilians, List No. 78, Dated 28 Mar 45, RE ʻSpecial
Questions on Koreans,ʼ” 3. Available online at: https://archives.seoul.go.kr/item/49.

53
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021

Ramseyer’s Paper: Criticisms of It, and Arguments in Its Favor

Their replies first suggest there was no forcible recruitment of women by the Japanese, nor
could such dragooning exist. Secondly, the people who were questioned explicitly call comfort
women “ prostitutes. ” Thirdly, there were two common ways through which one became acomfort woman. Both entailed voluntary contracts. When the woman was living with her parents,
the contract was a miuri agreement. When the woman was already working as a prostitute, shewould go to a comfort station by being resold, an example of which was given above. Existing
prostitutes could decide what to do much more easily because of their experience, compared tocases involving women with no such experience. The above testimony provides the briefest but
most complete picture concerning the reality of comfort women.
Let ʼ s look at another example. Chi-geun Park is known for his diar y, Ilbongun wianso
gwanriinui ilgi (Diary of a Japanese military comfort station manager).31 In his diary, which waslater published as a book, Park describes his life during 1943 and 1944. He worked as a clerk who
ushered people and oversaw accounting at comfort stations in Burma and Singapore. Park spentsome time working at a station that was owned by his brother-in-law―the younger brother of his
second wife. Parkʼs wife was running an inn in Daegu.
At that time, inns were often involved in prostitution businesses. So when Park was recruiting
comfort women with his brother-in-law, isnʼt it more likely that they negotiated with existing
prostitutes who had experience as sex workers and had a business relationship with Parkʼs wife?
This would make more sense than roaming in search of complete strangers―heartless parents
who were willing to sell their daughters―to procure women with no experience as sex workers.
Most former Korean comfort women said they were victims of employment fraud or weretraded away by their parents. No one has explicitly testified that she had worked as a prostitute
before going to the comfort stations. In Korea, disclosing such a work background would giverise to “social death.” For the same reason, no woman in Japan used her real name in revealing
her history as a prostitute and comfort woman, even after the comfort women issue came under
scrutiny in the early 1990s.

VI. Conclusion

Among the four possible ways to recruit comfort women―forcible recruitment, kidnappingtrafficking, miuri contracts, and the recruitment of existing prostitutes―the third and fourth
were the methods by which most comfort women were hired. This means that we should accept
that in most cases, comfort women and their parents signed business contracts with recruiters or
station owners. Even if no written contracts exist, the existence of economic actors who behaved
according to certain patterns shows that the contracting parties acted in compliance with theiragreements. This demonstrates the existence of contracts. If we accept that sex service is a kindof labor, these contracts are not different from ordinary work contracts between rank-and-file andmanagement. In the final analysis, comfort women were not “sex slaves” but sex workers.
To rely on the absence of written contracts to claim that there were no contracts at all, onemust deny the existence of the features that Ramseyer considers to be the substance of contracts―the payment of upfront advances, the existence of fixed contract periods, and the sharing ofsales revenue. So far, no criticisms of Ramseyerʼs article have succeeded in debunking his core
logic. Ramseyerʼs arguments provide an excellent opportunity for international academia to starta new discussion about the comfort women.

31

Byongjik Ahn, ed., Ilbongun wianso gwanriinui ilgi [Diar y of a Japanese militar y comfort station
manager] (Seoul: Esoop, 2013).

54
Japan Review Vol.4 No.2 Winter 2021