“That’s right, I am a feminist.”

Victim of anti-feminist ideological screening in the workplace appeals to the National Human Rights Commission

 

By Park Ju-yeon

Published July 15, 2026

Translated by Marilyn Hook

 

At the interview for a job at an institution certified by the Ministry of Employment and Labor to provide vocational skills development training, the candidate was asked, “You’re not a feminist, are you?”; after being hired, she was subjected to sexual harassment and sexually discriminatory comments such as, “Sex crimes happened in the past too, and they’re going to keep happening the future.” Now, this worker, Kim Min-ji, has decided to call attention to these incidents instead of keeping silent.  

On July 15, 2026 at 10 A.M., the ‘Press Conference on Complaints Regarding Sexist Harassment and Sexual Harassment at Vocational Skills Development Training Institutions’ took place in front of the National Human Rights Commission’s Seoul headquarters. The banner reads “NHRC, Take Action on Anti-feminist Ideological Screening in the Workplace!” (Source: Anti-feminist Ideological Screening Joint Response Committee)

As someone who has experienced anti-feminist ideological screening in the workplace, Ms. Kim has submitted a petition to the National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRC). On the morning of the 15^th, the Anti-feminist Ideological Screening Joint Response Committee comprising the Korean Women’s Trade Union, the Youth Community Union, the Korean Women Workers Association, Korea Womenlink, and Joint Action Against Gender Discrimination in Recruitment (itself composed of Korean Lawyers for Public Interest and Human Rights and 12 other organizations) held a press conference with Ms. Kim in front of the NHRC’s headquarters and boldly called for change. 

 

Discriminatory harassment, ideological screening, and lookism starting from the interview

System that prohibits workplace harassment “doesn’t apply because the organization has fewer than 5 employees”

According to remarks at the press conference, Ms. Kim was subjected to serious ideological screening starting from the interview stage. The then-director of the organization learned from Ms. Kim’s résumé that she had volunteered with a nonprofit organization that supports victims of sexual violence, and asked her, “You’re not a feminist, are you?”—a sexually discriminatory question.

 

After Ms. Kim was hired, the director continued to make abusive and sexually-harassing comments. Having learned that Ms. Kim was a victim of sexual violence, he probed for details about the incident while at a company dinner; after she answered, his response was to mock her, asking, “Why you?” He also routinely made comments about her appearance. 

 

Ms. Kim said, “One day I was called into the director’s office, and after he searched for the word ‘otaku’ online, he compared my appearance with that of characters in manga, saying things like, ‘Look in the mirror sometime,’ and commenting on my hair, glasses, clothes, and presence. He said, ‘Go to an outlet store on the weekend and buy some clothes. There are a lot of cheap places around here.’”

 

He even told her she had body odor and so should see a doctor. Ms. Kim recounted, "I was speechless; I would return to my desk and sit there in a daze for a long time, overwhelmed by a sense of humiliation—this kind of thing happened repeatedly." During her brief tenure of just over a month, Ms. Kim endured repeated insults and sexual harassment, and suffered from feelings of helplessness and shame; she began to question herself, wondering, "Am I really a strange person?" or "Am I really the problem?" Even those around her remarked, "You don't seem like the Min-ji I know."

 

Finally, she had no choice but to quit. Figuring ‘better late than never,’ she then wanted to do something about the harassment, but the organization has fewer than five employees, which means that it is exempt from the Labor Standards Act’s prohibitions against workplace harassment.

 

Ms. Kim further said that if people who seek gender equality are called feminists, then she would make a declaration on the spot, and said proudly, “That’s right, I am a feminist.” She then explained the reason for her complaint to the NHRC, stating, “I hope for a society where no one is subjected to screening or insults simply for pursuing gender equality.”

 

For female workers, it’s a “violation of the right to equality” and “workplace sexual harassment” 

The level of seriousness of the disadvantages for and attacks against feminists in the employment/contract relationship

 

Kang Mi-sol, an attorney with Korean Lawyers for Public Interest and Human Rights and the representative handling Ms. Kim’s petition, explained, “Ever since the issue of anti-feminist ideological screening surfaced in the gaming and online content industries around 2016, attacks on feminism and feminists have persisted across all areas of life, including the workplace.”

She expressed concern about “the continuous occurrence of incidents in which female workers are subjected to serious disadvantages in employment or contractual relationships solely for expressing interest in or sharing writings about feminism.”

 

Ms. Kang categorically stated that the actions of the object of the petition constituted “discriminatory conduct violating the right to equality by subjecting [the petitioner] to unfavorable treatment in employment based on her ideology or political views and gender.” She further pointed out that asking personal questions about someone’s dating life or sexual orientation, as well as making remarks that objectify a woman’s body through a sexual lens, amounts to “clear workplace sexual harassment.”

 

She also strongly criticized the institution’s director for “repeatedly making misogynistic and sexist remarks and sexual harassment at work against the petitioner, seriously violating her right to sexual self-determination and personal dignity,” even though the organization is a nationally recognized training institution, a status that requires a higher level of human rights sensitivity than ordinary companies. 

 

Helena Roh, co-director of the Anti-feminist Ideological Screening Joint Response Committee, explained “After the 2016 incident in which a voice actor was unfairly dismissed, anti-feminist ideological screening has spread uncontrollably in private companies and public organizations.”  She continued, “By yielding to demands for ideological screening for feminism in an effort to avoid controversy, companies and public institutions have set a harmful precedent. Since then, misogynistic forces have grown bolder, while companies have chosen to either pander to misogyny or remain silent rather than protect their workers.”

 

Ms. Roh emphasized the seriousness of the issue, saying, “Anti-feminist ideological screening has gone beyond digging through female workers’ social media and attacking them to threatening female workers’ livelihoods and even depriving them of the opportunity to realize their potential in the workplace.” In this way, “The harassment happened repeatedly during a critical period when the petitioner—the victim—needed to adjust to the workplace and demonstrate her capabilities; ultimately, the victim was forced to leave her job, her dignity violated.”

 

Ms. Roh, who emphasized that this kind of problem is “not a conflict between two individuals,” stated that it constitutes “discrimination rooted in an anti-feminist ideological screening—one that censors female workers' convictions, subjects them to insults for being feminists, and excludes them (from an organization) based on their views regarding gender equality.

After the press conference, the Anti-feminist Ideological Screening Joint Response Committee submitted a petition and request proposal to the NHRC. (Source: Anti-feminist Ideological Screening Joint Response Committee)

Demanding that the NHRC conduct an investigation and take steps to prevent further incidents

 

At the press conference, the Joint Response Committee said, “The National Human Rights Commission already, in 2020, expressed the opinion that harassment and job-related disadvantages for the reason of having shared feminist content or having expressed support for feminism are unjust.  It also clearly stated that laws, systems, and practices must be improved to prevent this kind of hatred and discrimination from occurring repeatedly. Therefore, the commission must now consistently apply these principles, that it has laid down, to this current case.”

 

The commission continued, “There is growing social concern about whether the commission is fulfilling its role,” and emphasized that, in “a situation where there is even criticism that it is responding more sensitively to political interests and the forces of hatred than to human rights principles,” the commission must make a proper judgment.

 

The commission made the following three specific requests.

First, the commission should confirm that the actions of the object of the petition [Ms. Kim’s former boss] constitute gender-based bullying and sexual harassment, as well as discriminatory behavior motivated by ideology and gender. 

Second, the commission should recommend that the Minister of Employment and Labor conduct a survey on the actual state of sexual harassment and gender discrimination regardless of workplace size, and devise effective improvement measures that include workplaces with fewer than five employees.

Third, the commission should recommend that the standards for designating and evaluating vocational skills development training institutions should include [whether the organization has] gender-equality policies, a sexual-harassment prevention system, and completion of human rights training, and further recommend the imposition of sanctions against businesses that do not meet these standards.

 

The joint response committee reiterated that “no one should be made to question their dignity in the workplace simply because they are a woman,” and declared that it would stand in solidarity with the petitioner to the very end to uphold the values ​​of gender-equal democracy. 

 

*Original article: https://ildaro.com/10501