Grey matter

In a classic turn of events that highlights the so-not-black-and-white-ness of being socially responsible, the blind masseurs of South Korea won the case to maintain the South Korean law stating that only the visually impaired can be licensed masseurs. From BBC: Blind S Korea masseurs win case:

A South Korean law which states that only the visually impaired can be licensed masseurs has been upheld in the country's Constitutional Court.

The licensed masseurs - who must be registered blind - have been protesting against moves to change the law.

They say it is a legal protection that provides many blind people with autonomy and an income.

Sighted masseurs said that the law infringed on free employment rights and criminalised them in their trade.

"The court decision is not only a verdict on our right to live but also a measure of South Korea's conscientiousness," said Lee Gyu-seong from the Korean Association of Masseurs.

Sure, you think, "Well hey, that's a good thing. Them blind people have work." And I'm not condemning the South Koreans for coming up with the law in the first place. It's a brilliant idea to get the blind to work instead of begging. From personal experience, I can tell you that many of the Malaysian blind folk make a conscious choice to beg instead of work because they make more money.

The positive implication of the law is that you give the blind gainful employment and a way to make a real living. You give them hope and a life. On the other hand, now that the law has become a way of life, it's become a way for the blind to become lazy, and instead of seeking out gainful employment where they could be better, they fall back on becoming masseurs.

Is there a union that ensures the quality of massage provided to protect the consumers? Are there schools to teach proper massage techniques to the blind? Where does the law leave the poor, sighted Koreans whose only skill is massaging? Are there measures in place that makes massaging a skilled profession that justifies the segmentation of society in this way? (NB: I'm asking this not because I'm questioning the authorities, but because I really don't know.)

If S. Korea rescinds the law, it makes them look like dictators where perception in developed countries is already just that. On the other hand, by leaving the law as is, S. Korea is allowing the blind their own careers, but at what cost? How willing will other business be to make an effort to hire the disabled when such laws exist? The general idea will be, "We don't need to hire the blind regardless of their other abilities. They've always got massaging". And while I always enjoy a good reflexology massage, one has to ask, "What are the real long-term economic and social implications of such a ruling on the blind?"