Scholars from around the world call for Ramseyer to retract comfort women article

Nobel laureate among more than 2,400 academics who have signed letter

Harvard Law School professor J. Mark Ramseyer. (Screenshot from Harvard Law School website)

A letter calling for the retraction of an article by Harvard Law School professor J. Mark Ramseyer that portrays the comfort women as prostitutes has been signed by more than 2,400 scholars from around the world.

As the paper was faced growing criticism from academics and activists, major media in the US have also started taking an interest in the story.

Within five days of its posting on Feb. 28, a letter calling for the retraction of Ramseyer’s paper — titled “Contracting for Sex in the Pacific War” — had been signed by 2,464 scholars.

The petitioners represent a range of academic disciplines, including economics, history and law, and a variety of countries, including the US, Australia, South Korea, Hong Kong and the UK. The list includes distinguished scholars such as Erik Maskin, a Nobel laureate and professor at Harvard University.

Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, professor of economics at Yale University and former chief economist of the World Bank, released a separate statement on Feb. 26 in which she sharply criticized Ramseyer’s for defending child prostitution.

While the Japanese press has stayed quiet about the furor over Ramseyer’s paper, the New York Times ran a story on Feb. 26 titled, “A Harvard prostitute called wartime sex slaves ‘prostitutes.’ One pushed back.”

“An international chorus of historians called for the article to be retracted, saying that [Ramseyer’s] arguments ignored extensive historical evidence and sounded more like a page from Japan’s far-right playbook,” the New York Times reported.

Criticism from the academy is growing as fatal flaws in the paper have come to light, including the fact that Ramseyer has never seen any Korean comfort women contracts, which should have served as evidence to back up his claims.

But Elsevier, the publisher of the International Review of Law and Economics, still intends to print the article in its March edition, alongside a rebuttal and a statement of concern.

By Kim So-youn, staff writer

Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]