Talk:Women in North Korea

Update and Organize
This article likely needs updating. Also, I couldn't come up with a good heading for the last two paragraphs. Please edit to clarify and organize this article. Thanks! User:Leena (talk) 09:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Pure propaganda
This entire article was clearly written by DPRK apologists. I don't even know where to begin with fixing this monstrosity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.39.23.117 (talk) 18:34, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Unsourced statement
"Women in North Korea are supposed to devote eight hours a day...to study (presumably, the study of Juche and Kim Il Sungism)" Does the part of this statement inside parenthesis have any evidence to back it or is it just pure conjecture? From a practical standpoint, the government needs to have skilled farmers, engineers and other people able to support the country's infrastructure; if this statement were true there would be no time for them to study. I don't support the DPRK, but an anonymous person's guess based on what an unnamed South Korean source said is hardly encyclopedic. I'm eliminating this section unless it's properly sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.11.71.109 (talk) 01:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

An individuals employment
Is the phrase correct?Xx236 (talk) 11:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Changed individuals > individual's Zeniff (talk) 03:10, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

This article, Miracle on the Han River, Minjung, and Juche
The articles were edited in 2010 by a group of registered editors. Xx236 (talk) 11:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Merge
The article Women's rights in North Korea (which is a very poor article) should be merged here. See explanation on Talk:Women's rights in North Korea. 2A02:2F01:501F:FFFF:0:0:6465:4682 (talk) 19:19, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Vast amounts of literature about women's rights in North Korea exist. For the modern perspective, the UN, US, South Korea govts, and various NGOs produce many, many reports on human rights in North Korea each year. Since women's rights has been recognized as a category of human rights, these reports include quite a bit on it. North Korea is a party to CEDAW, and there exists literature in connection to that as well. Historical perspectives are well-represented in literature about legal reforms in the late 1940s and early 1950s (see Women in the North Korean Revolution where some of this is discussed already). Sure, the article has room for improvement, but sources exist for this to be done. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:25, 1 June 2017 (UTC)


 * In my view, the article Women's rights in North Korea is very poor. As I said, much of it relies wholly on 2 newspaper articles, and the part that doesn't is a duplication of text from this article, relying on the same source used in this article. If the article Women's rights in North Korea is to stay, it has to be rewritten from scratch. 2A02:2F01:501F:FFFF:0:0:6465:4682 (talk) 22:01, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Confucianism
The lead states: "While most other Asian states have attempted to distance their contemporary society from Neo-Confucian ideals, North Korea has, to a large degree, embraced them." This cites an article by Jon Holliday which says:
 * This evasion may well be linked to a second one: the conspicuous failure of the DPRK to come to terms with its own Confucian past. Whereas both China and Vietnam have waged major campaigns of varying effectiveness against their

Confucian pasts, the DPRK stands out among the East Asian post-revolutionary regimes by its silence on this score. Confucianism struck particularly deep roots in Korea, and it is not fanciful to suggest that there may be powerful links between this Confucian past and the manifestly patriarchal present under the "Great Leader" Kim II Sung and the "Dear Leader" Kim long II (his son). This is considerably different. It doesn't say "most other Asian states"; it says "East Asian post-revolutionary regimes", namely China and Vietnam. It doesn't say that North Korea has "embraced" Confucianism; it says that North Korea has failed to "come to terms" with it, has been silent. I will try to amend the text.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:14, 3 June 2018 (UTC)