[Kim Seong-kon] What to do with ‘no kids zones’ [김성곤] '노키즈존' 어떻게 할 것인가

[김우정]

최근 외신에서 주목을 받고 있는 "노키즈존"에 대한 김성곤교수의 칼럼입니다.
프랑스의 르몽드 기사에 의하면 이러한 현상과 낮은 출산율은 우연이 아니라고 주장합니다.
세계 최하위의 출산율로 허덕이는 한국에서 아이들이 최우선이 되어야합니다.
물론 우리나라의 부모님들도 아이들에게 공공예절을 가르쳐야합니다.
 
[Kim Seong-kon] What to do with ‘no kids zones’
[김성곤] '노키즈존' 어떻게 할 것인가

Kim Seong-kon
Kim Seong-kon is a professor emeritus of English at Seoul National University and a visiting scholar at Dartmouth College. The views expressed here are his own. -- Ed 
김성곤씨는 서울대학교 영문과 명예교수이며 다트머스 대학교 방문교수이다. 이글의 견해는 그 자신의 것이다. – 편집부

Published : June 12, 2024 - 05:31
By Korea Herald

“No kids zones” in South Korea have caught the attention of the foreign press lately. In Le Monde, for example, an article appeared with the title: “South Korea’s ‘no kids zones’ flourish in cafes and restaurants.” Some time ago, The Washington Post, too, reported on South Korea’s no kids zones in an article entitled, “Is it discrimination if you can’t bring your kids to a restaurant?”
한국의 "노키즈존"은 최근 외국 언론의 관심을 끌었다. 예를 들어 르몽드에 "한국의 "노키즈존"은 카페와 식당에서 유행한다."라는 제목의 기사가 실렸다. 얼마 전, 워싱턴 포스트도 "식당에 아이들을 데려오지 못하면 차별인가?"라는 제목의 기사에서 한국의 노키즈존에 대해 보도했다.

According to the Le Monde article, the low birth rate in South Korea is “no coincidence” since contemporary Korean society “seems to find the mere presence of children exhausting. As proof, one need only consider the large number of establishments that refuse entry to the youngest customers.” It reports, “hundreds of establishments refusing entry to children have sprung up … which aim at ensuring calmer environments for grown-ups, but are also part of a broader effort to ostracize certain social groups.”
르몽드 기사에 따르면, 현대 한국 사회가 "아이들의 존재 자체를 지치게 만드는 것처럼 보이기 때문에" 한국의 낮은 출산율은 "우연이 아니다. 그 증거로, 우리는 단지 가장 어린 고객들에게 입장을 거부하는 많은 시설들만 고려하면 된다." 그것은 "아이들의 입장을 거부하는 수백 개의 시설들이 생겨났다… 그것은 성인들에게 더 차분한 환경을 보장하는 것을 목표로 하지만, 또한 특정한 사회 집단들을 따돌리기 위한 더 광범위한 노력의 일부이기도 하다"고 보도한다

According to the foreign press, the issues involved in no kids zones boil down to a debate about whether such spaces are “necessary to the rights of grown-ups for a calmer environment” or a form of “discrimination against children.” The debate, however, touches upon a deeper problem, which is whether it is OK to discriminate against “certain social groups” in order to protect the welfare of other groups.
외신에 따르면 어린이 보호구역과 관련된 논쟁은 이러한 공간이 "더 차분한 환경을 위해 성인의 권리에 필요한 것인지" 아니면 "아동에 대한 차별"의 한 형태인지에 대한 논쟁으로 귀결된다. 그러나 논쟁은 더 깊은 문제를 다루는데, 그것은 다른 집단의 복지를 보호하기 위해 "특정 사회 집단"을 차별하는 것이 괜찮은지이다.

In the eyes of those who are from countries that prioritize children above all other groups, “no kids zones” must sound like outrageous nonsense. People from countries where they strictly train their kids to behave in public places would not understand “no kids zones,” either. Those who are from countries that prohibit discrimination would be offended and appalled at such a discriminatory policy as well.
In Korean society, kids are not priority No. 1.
다른 모든 그룹보다 아이들을 우선시하는 나라 출신의 사람들의 눈에 "노 키즈 존"은 말도 안 되는 헛소리로 들릴 것이다. 공공장소에서 아이들이 행동하도록 엄격하게 훈련하는 나라 출신의 사람들도 "노 키즈 존"을 이해하지 못할 것이다. 차별을 금지하는 나라 출신의 사람들도 그러한 차별 정책에 불쾌하고 경악할 것이다.
한국 사회에서 아이들은 최우선이 아니다.

Traditionally a patriarchal society, Korean children have always been ignoble minors at home or in society. Until the end of the 19th century or the early 20th century, it was not common for children to have toys in Korea. For these historical reasons, the sign “no kids zone” might not be particularly offensive to the Korean mind.
전통적으로 가부장적 사회인 한국의 어린이들은 가정이나 사회에서 항상 무시할 수 없는 미성년자였다. 19세기 말이나 20세기 초까지, 한국에서 어린이들이 장난감을 갖는 것은 흔하지 않았다. 이러한 역사적인 이유들로, "노 키즈 존"이라는 표시는 한국인의 마음에 특별히 불쾌하지 않을 수도 있다.

In such a social atmosphere, Korean mothers become overprotective and tend to hold a “my children are priority No. 1” attitude. As a result, they are not enthusiastic about training their children to behave in public places because they think it might weaken and discourage their kid’s spirit. Cafe or restaurant owners who put up the sign, “No Kids Allowed,” have their own reasons: “Children scream, spill food all over and make a fuss.”
이런 사회적 분위기 속에서 한국 엄마들은 과잉보호를 하게 되고 "내 아이가 우선이다"라는 태도를 취하는 경향이 있다. 그 결과 아이들이 공공장소에서 행동하도록 훈련시키는 것이 아이들의 정신을 약화시키고 낙담시킬 수 있다고 생각하기 때문에 그들은 열정적이지 않다. "아이들은 소리를 지르고, 음식을 사방에 쏟고, 소란을 피운다."라는 팻말을 든 카페나 식당 주인들은 그들만의 이유가 있다.

As for “discrimination,” the Korean people seem to think that it is ubiquitous already and thus the “no kids zone” sign is not particularly offensive.
"차별"에 대해 한국인자들은 이미 어디에나 있고 따라서 "노 키즈 존" 표시가 특별히 불쾌하지 않다고 생각하는 것 같다.

When anti-American sentiment swept the nation during the Roh Moo-hyun administration, some Korean restaurants and gas stations put up the sign: “We do not serve Americans.” When anti-Japan sentiment spread during the Moon Jae-in government, some radicals smashed Japanese cars parked on the street. However, we can neither allow nor tolerate any kind of discrimination under any circumstances.
노무현 정부 시절 반미 감정이 팽배해지자 일부 한국 식당과 주유소에는 미국인을 대접하지 않는다는 안내 문구가 내걸렸다. 문재인 정부 시절 반일 감정이 확산되자 일부 과격분자들은 길가에 세워둔 일본 자동차를 부수기도 했다. 그러나 어떤 경우에도 차별을 용납할 수도, 용납할 수도 없다.

We can also find the reasons for such discrimination somewhere else, such as the Korean people’s notion of a public place. In many other countries, a public place primarily refers to somewhere people gather and have fun together in leisure, even though public etiquette is required. Since Seoul is an extremely crowded city, however, Koreans seem to think of a public place primarily as a site where you should be cautious not to get on other people’s nerves. No kids zones might stem from that cultural attitude.
우리는 또한 공공장소에 대한 한국인의 개념과 같은 다른 곳에서 그러한 차별에 대한 이유를 찾을 수 있다. 많은 다른 나라에서 공공장소는 공공 예절이 필요함에도 불구하고 주로 사람들이 모여서 여가를 즐기는 곳을 의미한다. 그러나 서울은 매우 복잡한 도시이기 때문에 한국인들은 주로 다른 사람들의 신경을 거슬리게 하지 않도록 조심해야 하는 장소로 공공장소를 생각하는 것 같다. 어떤 키즈 존도 그러한 문화적 태도에서 비롯되지 않을 수 있다.

Still, discrimination against kids is neither fair nor right. In fact, many children behave admirably in public places. You cannot stereotype kids and ban all of them from public places. Since minors come with adults -- particularly their parents --the no kids zones discriminate against the mothers and fathers, too, making an unjust double discrimination.
그럼에도 불구하고, 아이들에 대한 차별은 공정하지도 않고 옳지도 않다. 사실, 많은 아이들이 공공장소에서 훌륭히 행동합니다. 아이들에게 고정관념을 심어주고, 모든 아이들이 공공장소에 있는 것을 금지시킬 수는 없다. 미성년자들이 어른들, 특히 그들의 부모들과 함께 오기 때문에, 어린이 보호구역은 엄마와 아빠를 부당하게 이중으로 차별하는 것이다.
 
Recently, a restaurant in Seoul refused entry to a woman and her child. She turned out to be a National Assembly woman. Now, the Korean National Assembly is legislating a law that prohibits no kids zones in public places. When the National Assembly passes the law, these child-free areas will become history in South Korea.
최근, 서울의 한 식당은 한 여성과 그녀의 아이의 출입을 거부했습니다. 그녀는 국회의원 여성으로 밝혀졌다. 이제, 한국 국회는 공공 장소에서 어린이 보호구역을 금지하는 법을 입법하고 있습니다. 국회가 이 법을 통과시킬 때, 이 어린이 보호구역들은 한국의 역사가 될 것이다.

Still, however, we need to ponder why the foreign press is reporting it as news, and why we might want to alter our consciousness to meet global standards. Meanwhile, we should refrain from discriminating against the marginalized in our society, such as kids, senior citizens or the disabled. At the same time, Korean mothers should teach public etiquette to their children so they behave in public places.
그러나, 우리는 왜 외국 언론이 그것을 뉴스로 보도하고 있는지, 그리고 왜 우리가 세계적인 기준에 맞게 우리의 의식을 바꾸려고 하는지 생각해 볼 필요가 있다. 한편, 우리는 아이들, 노인들 또는 장애인들과 같은 우리 사회의 소외된 사람들을 차별하는 것을 삼가야 한다. 동시에, 한국의 어머니들은 그들의 아이들에게 공공장소에서 행동하도록 공공 예절을 가르쳐야 한다.

In some American stores or educational farms, sometimes you can see a sign, “No dogs allowed, except guide dogs.” Children are not dogs. Besides, there is always an exception, such as guide dogs. We should respect and protect kids, instead of banning them from public places.
일부 미국 가게나 교육 농장에서는 때때로 "안내견을 제외하고 개는 허용되지 않는다"라는 표지판을 볼 수 있다. 아이들은 개가 아니다. 게다가, 안내견과 같은 예외도 항상 있다. 우리는 아이들을 공공장소에서 금지하는 대신 존중하고 보호해야 한다.

#Nokidszones노키즈존 #Discrimination차별 #Publicplace공공장소 #Culturalattitude문화적태도 #Lowbirthrate낮은출산율 #Patriarchalsociety가부장적사회 #Overprotective과잉보호 #Publicetiquette공공예절 #Marginalized소외된 #Legislation입법