"Right to Speak" vs "So Embarrassing" Leggings Controversy, What Do You Think? [Han Seung-gon's Incident Notebook]

Secretly Filming Women Wearing Leggings... Guilty in 1st Trial, Not Guilty in 2nd, Guilty in Supreme Court
Case Sparks Controversy Over Leggings as Everyday Wear and Conflicts Over 'Gender Sensitivity'
Some Men Say "Avoid Public Places," Women Say "Issue of Discriminatory Gaze"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Han Seung-gon] Controversy is arising over leggings that cling tightly to the lower body. While men say leggings have become quite common, they argue that leggings worn by women can appear embarrassing depending on the situation. On the other hand, women counter that leggings are everyday wear and that various crimes occur due to discriminatory views from some men, intensifying the conflict.

As disputes over men’s and women’s perceptions of leggings continue, the controversy has deepened with crimes involving secretly filming women wearing leggings. The man involved was found guilty in the first trial, acquitted in the second, but the Supreme Court overturned the acquittal, ruling that the act of secretly filming women in leggings is subject to legal punishment.

◆ Supreme Court overturns 'not guilty' verdict on illegal filming of leggings: "Causes sexual humiliation"

According to media reports on the 7th, in 2018, Mr. A, who was on a bus, secretly filmed the lower body of Ms. B, who was standing near the door wearing leggings, for about 8 seconds using his mobile phone. At the time, Ms. B was wearing a loose top that extended downward, so few parts of her body were directly exposed, but the clothes were tight enough to reveal the body contours.

Eventually, Mr. A was fined 700,000 won in the first trial but acquitted in the second trial. The reasoning was that he did not specifically zoom in on any particular body part, and since leggings have become everyday wear, they could not be considered objects of sexual desire. Furthermore, the court ruled that the victim’s statement that she felt "disgusted" could not be definitively interpreted as sexual humiliation.

However, the Supreme Court’s judgment differed. The Supreme Court clarified that sexual crimes are not limited to exposed body parts. Even if clothes cling to the body revealing contours, it can cause sexual humiliation, and whether humiliation occurs can vary depending on the situation, even if the same body part is filmed.

Regarding the scope of sexual humiliation, the court stated that it can manifest broadly in various forms such as shame, anger, and insult, and considering the victim’s testimony, it is sufficiently understood that humiliation was caused. The court also ruled for the first time that everyone has the "sexual freedom" not to be sexualized against their will. With the Supreme Court overturning the case with a guilty verdict, Mr. A will face a retrial in the second trial.

A woman is exercising wearing leggings. Photo by Pixabay

◆ "Why not just not wear leggings in the first place?" "Why commit crimes?"

Regarding the Supreme Court’s ruling, some men argue that women should simply not wear leggings that could cause "sexual humiliation." This is a claim that blames the victim in sexual crime situations. They also say that although leggings have become everyday wear, they can appear embarrassing depending on the situation. Women rebut this as a typical perpetrator’s logic.

Mr. Kim, a male office worker in his 50s, said, "These days, I sometimes see women wearing leggings on buses or subways, but it is true that it looks embarrassing to consider them everyday wear." He added, "Wearing them in specific places like gyms or exercise spaces probably wouldn’t be a problem."

Some men expressed that wearing leggings itself is not the problem, but it might look embarrassing depending on the person and situation. Mr. Lee, a male office worker in his 30s, said, "Leggings themselves are not the problem," but emphasized, "However, depending on the viewer and the situation, they might appear embarrassing."

Women find this absurd. They argue that leggings have long been everyday wear and that the problem lies with those who commit crimes, not with those who wear leggings. Ms. Park, a female office worker in her 30s, said, "I sometimes wear leggings, but I don’t think it’s a social problem at all." She added, "Now we even have to raise our voices for the 'right to wear leggings'? I can’t understand it," expressing frustration.

Ms. Kim, a female university student in her 20s, said, "The controversy caused by men saying leggings are embarrassing is nothing new," and raised her voice, "I don’t know how long this dispute will continue." She further criticized, "Should everyone wearing leggings while hiking, on the street, or on the bus be pointed at?"

A fashion brand store displaying leggings. The photo is unrelated to specific expressions in the article. [Image source=Yonhap News]

◆ Embarrassing leggings... but long established as everyday wear

As women claim, leggings have long become a common outfit. Especially recently, due to the impact of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19), more people exercise at home, and the related industry has steadily grown. According to Gmarket, from April 18 to May 17 last year, sales of yoga and Pilates bottoms including leggings increased by 391% compared to the same period the previous year.

This is due to the popularity of the "athleisure" style, a portmanteau of "athletic" and "leisure." Athleisure is lightweight sportswear that crosses the boundary between sportswear and everyday wear. Representative items include leggings, yoga wear, and workout clothes.

Also, 8 out of 10 Koreans have a favorable view of athleisure. According to a survey conducted by market research firm Embrain Trend Monitor in March last year targeting 1,000 men and women aged 15 to 64 nationwide, 74.8% of respondents said, "Sportswear is an important means of expressing individuality."

In particular, athleisure received many positive responses such as being △active (65.1%, multiple answers allowed) △comfortable (60.5%) △free (53.8%) and △functional (44.9%).

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court emphasized that secretly filming someone just because they are wearing leggings in public places or using crowded public transportation is unacceptable. This implies that blaming the victim by saying, "Isn’t it their fault for wearing body-hugging leggings?" is inappropriate.

The court stated, "The body parts that can cause sexual desire or humiliation are not uniformly determined by specific body parts but are considered in the context of filming and the resulting footage. It means cases where filming or being filmed can cause sexual desire or humiliation." It added, "Therefore, even if the victim exposes body parts in public places by their own will, it should not be hastily concluded that it is not subject to the crime of filming using a camera, etc."