[Current & Culture] No Entry for Children, Seniors, or Ajumma

Hiding Discrimination Behind English Elitism
Why "No Kids Zone" and Similar Signs Avoid Korean Language

This happened a few years ago at a group dinner. When a cooking competition show came up in conversation, woman A mentioned that her boyfriend was a chef at a Chinese restaurant. As the conversation continued, another attendee, B, used the term "Chinese restaurant cook," which caused an issue. A insisted that her boyfriend was not a "Chinese restaurant cook," but a "Chinese restaurant chef." Then, yet another attendee, C, asked what the difference was, and I found myself wondering the same thing. What exactly is the difference between a Chinese restaurant and a Chinese eatery, or between a chef and a cook? I don't remember how the conversation ended that day, and my curiosity remains unresolved. Honestly, aside from the difference between English and Korean terminology, I can't see much distinction.

People often use English as a kind of smokescreen when they want to avoid the direct meaning of a Korean word (including Sino-Korean words). In particular, English is frequently overlaid to create a more sophisticated or refined impression. The case above is likely an example of this. Such instances are very common, appearing not only in private conversations but also in the media and even in official names. Sometimes, English expressions are preferred to conceal a blatant intention. For example, a store that prohibits children uses the term "No Kids Zone" instead of the straightforward Korean equivalent, "Children Not Allowed." I've never seen a restaurant with a sign in Korean stating this policy.

Recently, following the "No Kids Zone," the emergence of "No Senior Zone" has sparked controversy. Just as some establishments ban children on the grounds that noisy or running kids disturb other customers, some places now prohibit seniors, claiming they disrupt business. There are various examples. Swimming pools cite seniors entering the pool without showering, and cafes point to seniors who stay for extended periods. While I understand the difficulties faced by small business owners, this approach is clearly discriminatory and hateful, with no need for further debate.

There are also middle-aged and younger people who behave unhygienically in pools or linger too long in cafes. Not all seniors act inconsiderately, and the claim that such behavior is especially common among the elderly is mere speculation with no solid evidence. Language is not only a tool for communication but also a reflection of consciousness. The episode where a woman was offended by her boyfriend being called a "Chinese restaurant cook" instead of a "Chinese restaurant chef" shows that a sense of cultural subservience still lingers. Stores that cannot boldly put up a "No Entry" sign in Korean but instead advertise themselves as "No Kids Zones" or "No Senior Zones" are hiding behind English elitism to justify discrimination and hatred. At this rate, we might even see places banning "ajumma" and "ajusshi" (middle-aged women and men)... In fact, after writing this, I found that such places already exist.

At a gym in Incheon, a sign was boldly posted stating, "Ajumma Not Allowed." The warning explained that only "cultured and elegant women" would be permitted entry, citing repeated incidents of middle-aged women stealing items from the locker room or doing laundry in the showers. This case even attracted attention overseas, with the BBC mentioning both "No Kids Zones" and "No Senior Zones" and pointing out a growing trend in Korea of excluding specific groups. Some call this a trend or a cultural phenomenon, but I disagree. Discrimination and hatred are barbaric acts that cannot be categorized as trends or culture. I am neither a senior, a child, nor an ajumma, but I oppose these kinds of exclusionary zones.

Lee Jaeik, SBS Radio Producer and Novelist