Taking a Picture of a Woman’s Legs Without Her Permission Is Not Sexual Harassment
South Korea’s top court ruled that a man who photographed the legs of a woman wearing a miniskirt without her knowledge was not committing sexual harassment. The man used his cell phone’s camera to take the picture of the woman as she sat in front of him, wearing a miniskirt, on the underground.
Interestingly, news reports have made it a point to tell us that the woman was in her twenties. Perhaps so that we know it was worthwhile to take that picture.
In South Korea, any unauthorized filming of someone else’s body parts “to create sexual desire or shame” constitutes sexual harassment - a crime subject to five years in prison or a fine of up to $US 10,000 dollars. However, the court ruled that, “it is difficult to say that the accused took a picture of someone else’s body parts to cause sexual desire or shame”.
I wonder why he took that picture and what he was planning on doing with it other then “create sexual desire”, but no doubt this is the type of law that makes it very difficult to prove intent and get a conviction.
Women’s groups have protested the court’s acquittal, saying that it doesn’t matter which part of the body the man photographed, it is an infringement of human rights if he took the picture without her permission.
Brian thinks this is not really a sexual harassment issue – it’s a privacy issue and so it applies to men as well.
As far as I know, in the US, it is perfectly legal to take pictures of people in public places. According to photojojo, “anyone in a public place can take pictures of anything they want… people can be photographed if they are in public, without their consent, unless they have secluded themselves and can expect a reasonable degree of privacy. Kids swimming in a fountain? Okay. Somebody entering their PIN at the ATM? Not okay.”
Flickr is filled with what appears to be candid photos of women in miniskirts. No one seems to be getting sued over those.
Sources:
ABC News
Korea Times
Photo by producer john mathew
Did you enjoy this post? Subscribe by RSS or email and you’ll always know when I publish a new post.
Find out what I’m doing right now: follow me on Twitter.
Filed under Women & Feminism —
Email This Post,
Subscribe To Comments, Trackback,
ironman responds:
Posted: March 25th, 2008 at 1:01 pm →
“I wonder why he took that picture and what he was planning on doing with it other then “create sexual desire”.
Funny.
You’re right - how can you enforce this type of law? And it makes sense that if you are OK with people looking at you in public, they should also be able to take your picture. Paparazzi would be out of work if it wasn’t legal.
Computer Addict responds:
Posted: March 25th, 2008 at 2:39 pm →
If you’re in public - you’re in public. If you don’t want people looking at your bare legs, or taking pictures of them - don’t bare them.
Brian responds:
Posted: March 25th, 2008 at 5:57 pm →
Thanks for the link. I can see how photographing somebody’s legs, or anywhere else, in public might be construed as sexual harassment. After all, how is that any different than ogling somebody? (Not a rhetorical question, I’m interested in the legal and social differences). But, in Korea’s case I still feel it’s a case about privacy and not, as the women’s groups said, just about violating a woman. Even in the quotation from the Korea Times article, the woman said “it is an infringement of human rights if he took the picture without her permission.” However, if you take a look at that photojournalism text posted and translated by the Metropolitician, it says that the “right” to privacy and happiness in Korea are infringed upon if a person uses a photograph for commercial gain. And not that I’m trying to dehumanize anyone, but is a person snapping a photo of a woman on the subway—as creepy as that might be—really doing anything different than if he were to photograph anything else around town?
I’m not sure if you’re in Korea or if you read many Korean blogs, but it doesn’t take much effort to find stories of Koreans flipping out whenever a foreigner photographs them or their store. Yet as I mentioned, foreigners are photographed all the time and are frequently used in advertisements without their knowledge. The novelty factor of seeing a white guy doing something Korean, or at least something in Korea. The right to privacy does not seem to extend to non-citizens within South Korea’s borders.
MomGrind responds:
Posted: March 25th, 2008 at 7:16 pm →
@ ironman: “Paparazzi would be out of work if it wasn’t legal.” True.
@ Computer Addict: I agree that once you go out in public, you give up your right to privacy, as far as the law is concerned.
@ Brian: From an ethical point of view, there is a privacy issue here - but that’s in addition to the sexual harassment issue. Would he have taken a picture of a man’s legs if a man in shorts was sitting in front of him? Having said that, I live in California and admittedly know nothing about Korean culture or laws. I found your comment very interesting. Thank you.
Google Search Terms: The Funny, The Sad, And The CREEPY - MomGrind responds:
Posted: July 11th, 2008 at 4:02 am →
[…] “Woman without legs“. Why, oh why would you search for that? Where they ended up: Taking a Picture of a Woman’s Legs without her Permission is Not Sexual Harassment […]
Baldi responds:
Posted: October 1st, 2008 at 10:31 pm →
Interesting debate. I once beat up a guy because he took a photo of my wife without permission (young days, hot blood etc., plus he was amller than me, heheh). In my mind taking a photo without permission means that you KNOW permission would not be granted, hence it is wrong.
I am not from the US and in my society it is a big no no to take womens photos unless you know them. I am careful of the background when I am photographing my family so as not to cause offence.
Baldi responds:
Posted: October 1st, 2008 at 10:33 pm →
errrr..
amaller = smaller
I really need a blog with spell check
MomGrind responds:
Posted: October 1st, 2008 at 10:38 pm →
@ Baldi: I wonder what my husband would do if someone took my photo without permission.