[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/lawdev/v15y2022i1p201-214n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Ramseyer’s Response to the Critics of “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War”

Author

Listed:
  • Lee Yong-Shik

    (The Law and Development Institute, Atlanta, USA)

Abstract
A controversial paper by Ramseyer, “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War,” which argued that the victims of sexual slavery (“the comfort women”) perpetrated by the Japanese military during World War II were voluntary prostitutes under contract, has raised substantial controversy around the world. This argument has provoked a public outcry, and thousands of scholars, including Nobel laureates, have criticized this paper and denounced it. Ramseyer has subsequently published a response to these critics in a non peer-reviewed, publicly accessible paper series disseminated by the John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics, and Business at Harvard University. His response does not remedy fundamental flaws and inaccuracies in his original paper. This essay discusses these flaws and inaccuracies and also points out the problematic manner in which the author mischaracterizes and omits key materials, misleading readers. The war may have ended several decades ago, but its trauma continues today, exacerbated by the troubling denials of the atrocities.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee Yong-Shik, 2022. "On Ramseyer’s Response to the Critics of “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War”," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 201-214, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:lawdev:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:201-214:n:1
    DOI: 10.1515/ldr-2022-0004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ldr-2022-0004
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ldr-2022-0004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:lawdev:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:201-214:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.