In 2015, South-Korea and Japan came to a ‘final’ agreement concerning the ‘comfort women’ issue. This contribution reveals that this deal signals the next stage in a process of denial through which Japanese authorities have structurally denied the women’s’ victimhood. Taking a discourse analytical approach, the contribution investigates this historical process of denial and its implications. The analysis shows that denial takes several forms and performs different functions throughout the process. It demonstrates that denial is an interactional phenomenon, has different psychologies underlying it, and that it operates on different levels. Denial ultimately contributes to a state of continued victimization. |
Artikel |
‘Troostmeisjes’: Over de structurele ontkenning van seksuele slavernij en voortschrijdende victimisatie |
Tijdschrift | Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 2 2017 |
Trefwoorden | comfort women, denial, sexual slavery, discourse analysis |
Auteurs | dr. mr. Roland Moerland |
Samenvatting |
Artikel |
Reageren op problematisch wetenschappelijk gedrag voorbij de moralisering: een ander wetenschapsbeleid is mogelijk! |
Tijdschrift | Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2015 |
Trefwoorden | Science studies, Scientific fraud, Science policy, Knowledge economy, Regulation of sciences |
Auteurs | Prof. dr. Serge Gutwirth en prof. dr. Jenneke Christiaens |
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie |
In this article the authors focus upon the measures taken as a reaction against scientific fraud against the background of the contemporary science policy that turns the practice of science into a knowledge economy. In the light of the availability but obvious underuse of reactive legal means, they question the recourse to proactive ethical control and regulation of the scientific activities. They contend that such science policy is not so much the expression of a reaction against exceptional cases of scientific fraud, than of an endeavour to discipline and control scientist to the constraints of the knowledge economy. For the authors, however, the latter is the problem to be solved: another science policy is needed. |