Drama Special under fire for lesbian content
by javabeans
KBS’s Drama Special, an anthology series of one-act (aka single-episode) dramas, is into its second season now, and its latest installment has become a target of netizen controversy. Today’s (August 7) episode is titled Daughters of Bilitis Club and is peopled entirely with lesbian characters, its title borrowing from the American lesbian rights group Daughters of Bilitis.
Homosexuality is becoming more visible on Korean television screens in both scripted and unscripted forms, and has been a key story point in several network drama series like Coffee Prince, Personal Taste, and Life Is Beautiful. Off network, there was the cable reality program Coming Out, which featured real-life gay people and showcased their stories of identity and acceptance.
It’s promising to see the topic handled with sensitivity and thoughtfulness, even if the progress is slow. But it seems the public is still far from accepting, what with the ill-informed campaigns of netizen mothers who railed against Life Is Beautiful, accusing the show of possibly turning their currently-totally-straight children gay in the near or far future, yunno, just in case The Gay is transmittable through airwaves and the power of suggestion. And now Drama Special has received complaints for the Daughters of Bilitis Club episode, with demands to take it off the air immediately. Some have called its frank portrayal of its lesbian characters unfit for television.
This really is too bad, because when I first heard about this one, I was intrigued by the subject and was hoping it would be noteworthy for its story. Drama Specials can be hit or miss, but overall I find it to be a quality program that treats its stories with a light and thoughtful touch.
Featured in Daughters of Bilitis Club are several pairs of lesbian characters, who span multiple generations: Representing the 50s age range are two familiar veteran actresses, Choi Ran (Hong Gil Dong, You’re Beautiful) and Kim Hye-ok (Scent of a Woman, Bad Guy); in their 30s are careerwomen Han Go-eun (A Man Called God) and Oh Se-jung (Yi San); and playing teenage students are Jin Se-yeon (The Duo) and Ahn Ji-hyun (While You Were Sleeping).
Writing is Sohn Ji-hye of this year’s KBS series President, while the PD is Han Jun-seo, who worked on dramas like My Precious You and Capital Scandal and has directed a few other Drama Special episodes.
In the older generation, Kim Hye-ok is estranged from her daughter (played by Chuno’s Min Ji-ah), probably due to her relationship with her partner (Choi Ran). However, the daughter decides to meet with her mother before she departs for the U.S., and their meeting is rife with mother-daughter love and strife.
In the middle generation, Han Go-eun’s character is in a relationship with a woman (Oh Se-jung) who isn’t fully certain of her sexuality (I hesitate to use the word bisexual because she hasn’t made the choice to be bi, either; the description points out that she’s still undecided).
In the teen generation, Jin Se-yeon plays a senior in high school who likes a girl in a different class at school, and is in search of other lesbian teenagers like herself to connect with.
On the upside, Daughters of Bilitis Club has met with a positive response from some of its viewers who appreciated the subject matter and its treatment. By all accounts, the story is more about the emotions of these women than a salacious attempt at sensationalism. The motifs at play include a mother’s pain, a teenager’s uncertainty and angst, and the hurt of a woman whose lover left her and married a man.
And despite the loud voices of the offended, not all the responses are angry. Some comments have been more open-minded, stating that “The world is big and drama topics diverse, this is just one of many.” And “Homosexuality is no longer just for minority of people. It’s a subject that we should think about deeply and thoughtfully as a society.” And “I welcome the Korean version of The L Word.”
I’m not saying we all have to agree on our thoughts regarding homosexuality, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that all people be treated as people, regardless of whom they love. With that in mind, let’s keep the comments even-keel and insults to a minimum, yes?
Via Star News, Mk.co.kr, Star News
RELATED POSTS
- Drama Special Hair Show premieres Sunday
- Baek Sung-hun leads the boys in Monster
- Bae Soo-bin is the loser’s hope in KBS’s Drama Special
- Life Is Beautiful cuts out gay vows, angers writer
- Yoo Gun and Sohn Hyun-joo’s Drama Special
- Drama Special: The Great Gye Choon-bin
- Drama Special: Our Slightly Risque Relationship
Tags: controversies, Drama Special, Han Go-eun
![[Beanie Review] Seoul Busters](https://d263ao8qih4miy.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/SeoulBusters_reviewb.jpg)
![[K-drama Treasure Hunt] Sitting on swings together](https://d263ao8qih4miy.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Kdrama-treasure-hunt.png)
Required fields are marked *
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
1 pampi
August 7, 2011 at 1:17 PM
thats so sad!!!art is art. too cruel
Required fields are marked *
2 ladystar
August 7, 2011 at 1:24 PM
So sad, people need to be educated about this topic. Humans are all equal, no matter the sexual orientation.
Required fields are marked *
marisa
August 7, 2011 at 8:40 PM
Hear! Hear! Well said and so very true.
None of us are free until all of us are free...
Required fields are marked *
Terra
August 9, 2011 at 3:57 PM
All humans are bi
Required fields are marked *
3 Vilicia
August 7, 2011 at 1:25 PM
that s really sad bcause they r actors ,it s not a reality tv show.it s art.
Required fields are marked *
4 danna
August 7, 2011 at 1:31 PM
also this is definitely not the first time even Drama Special has touched on the topic of homosexuality, they also did Secret Garden with Baek Jin Hee playing a High Schooler struggling with her feelings for a her best friend, and I actually loved that episode and thought it was one of the better done Drama Specials...this one seems interesting and I would love to watch it, I'm glad that korean media is bringing in more and more topics like these...and while the complaints they are recieving are certainly sad, hopefully in time the public will also become more accepting
Required fields are marked *
5 jomo143
August 7, 2011 at 1:35 PM
After watching LIB and reading about SK's reaction, I wondered if any dramas featured female gay characters.
I know it will be a slow and extremely painful process for the GBLT community in SK. It breaks my heart because people who fear what/who they don't understand are really doing a disservice to themselves. Hopefully the children these ant-different groups desperately think they are protecting will be more understanding, and the next generation will be more open.
Required fields are marked *
6 just a girl
August 7, 2011 at 1:53 PM
Ignorance is universal. We have a "concerned parents" group in the US that was pitching a fit about Degrassi and its LGBT characters.
I hope this show is able to open minds and start honest discussion, which is what art should do. (I also hope that it doesn't end horribly like the L Word - I still hate you Jenny!!)
Required fields are marked *
7 sara
August 7, 2011 at 2:08 PM
MY SISTER IS A LEASBIAN and do you think I hate her because of this? Your damn wrong, I even love her more and will always be there for her is she needs me! My parents don't know about it but my father once said something that really hurt me(my sister was not there)! He said that lesbians have no right to adopt a child, wth hell is this thought? only because that child would have 2 mothers, who cares. If my father won't accept her like she is I will break my contact with him! Gays and Lesbians are aloud to love whoever they want!
Required fields are marked *
8 I Quit
August 7, 2011 at 2:24 PM
Comment was deleted
Required fields are marked *
Alice
August 7, 2011 at 2:40 PM
Conflating racism and homophobia does a disservice to both LGBTQ people and people of color. They're both bad but they have separate histories and should be considered as separate struggles if they are going to be diminished or eradicated.
Required fields are marked *
msim
August 7, 2011 at 8:54 PM
Most of the time my life is lovely but when I have experienced discrimination from racists/sexists/homophobes; it felt unjust in exactly the same way.
Yes, all these things have different histories but when you're in the middle of experiencing it - I assure you - it all feels the same.
I dislike when people try to separate racism and homophobia since most people on earth are of colour therefore most gay people are of colour as well.
Same thing for sexism or any other prejudice that makes some humans consider it acceptable to restrict rights for other human beings.
Required fields are marked *
CityHunter4ever
August 7, 2011 at 5:47 PM
I disagree - Homosexuality has not actually been proven as 'genetic', the 'gay gene' was never found. The APA had to amend their view on homosexuality due to the lack of evidence to support such a claim. So to say that a person's 'born that way' the same way a persons born black or white is inaccurate, misleading and a pretty low attempt to make people accept what they don't have to.
If being black and being gay are the same then please tell me where have you ever seen a black person in 'confusion' over their racial identity and then coming to a conclusion that they're actually, really black (or white) on the inside? And then trying to get all their friends to accept them the way they are? Would you call that 'born that way'?
If you can 'question' your sexuality, isn't your conclusion a 'decision'? and what about having gay thoughts but never becoming gay? Does that mean you have the 'gay-thought-no-action' gene? What about people who 'discover' their sexuality later in life after having a wife and kids? 'gay-after-40-gene'? What if a potentially gay person lives a totally heterosexual life and dies before he discovers his sexuality? Are these problems that black or white people people face because of their colour?
Take Coffee Prince and SSK for example - both leads fell in love with their counter-parts thinking they were male. They both thought they were gay. They had gay thoughts about the other person. They were both shocked to find out the other was female.
What, exactly, was their sexuality?
For that brief time, they were definitely gay. Had YEH or PMY been males, they would be in a gay relationship with them having gay sex. But then they found out they were girls and they still liked them so they became straight again.
Sexuality is definitely not genetic and set in stone.
Since it is not genetic, I cannot accept it. The whole 'everybody has a right to love' concept (love somehow translating as sex) is biased. If it were truly so, we should accept this sort of 'love' between siblings, mothers and sons and fathers and daughters, young consenting kids and older partners, men and trees too should not be looked at weirdly for their behaviour. And since in I find all of the above morally objective and illogical the same applies to homosexuality.
I personally do not wish to see such behaviour passed off as a genetic thing on T.V. or promoted in this wrong light. So I'm with the people putting this under fire.
Required fields are marked *
QuietLurker
August 7, 2011 at 6:17 PM
Actually a lot of people are confused about their race. I have plenty of Black or Hispanic or Asian friends who feel that they have no identity with their race and really only identify with the "White American" race.
And lets not forget mixed kids who have to choose all the time. Maybe they identify more with one race but look more like the other race. So the world see's them as one way but they see themselves as another. Tiger Woods whole "Coblanasian" identity speaks to that.
Having a gene or not is irrelevant. Clearly their isn't a mixed gene but obviously you can have people that are mixed. Same goes for your sexual preference.
Required fields are marked *
ripleyfell
August 7, 2011 at 6:30 PM
I agree. In fact, my cousin who's about six years old and mixed identifies herself with her African father. She told me to my face when I asked that she's "black" even though she looks identical to her Caucasian mother.
Required fields are marked *
ladida
August 7, 2011 at 6:47 PM
I disagree:
Mixed-race children have been known to be confused about what "race" they are. Similarly black kids who don't identify with the stereotypical black representation (rap music, urban language, etc.) are teased for being "white" and white kids who do identify with that representation are often told they're being disingenuous. So racial confusion is very common. Sometimes black people who can "pass" for white do so in order to be able to survive in whatever environment she/he is in, and this does not mean that that person is or isn't black. It just means identity is fluid.
Also, the above response makes it sound as if the only reason racism is wrong is because people cannot choose their race, as if if we were able to choose our "races" and someone chose to be black, then discriminating against that person and hating that person would be morally and ethically right. Racism isn't wrong because "race" is genetic (it's actually as constructed as anything else); racism is wrong because hatred toward other human beings as a whole -- as opposed to individuals -- is disgusting and gross. Alternately, if a gene were found that identified pedophiles as being "born that way," would it then be morally acceptable? Your argument is not only offensive (comparing homosexuality to incest, that's one step away from comparing it to pedophilia) but fallacious.
Also, science is as constructed a system as any other: it used to be "scientifically verifiable" that black people and Jews were not people at all, but some form of animal, so I'm not sure why scientific documentation is necessary for "acceptance." (The idea of "accepting" other people is a little absurd -- how does one "accept" that another is black? a woman? and Irishman? taller than you? But that's an argument for another time.)
I don't think that it matters wether people are "born gay" or not. It is besides the point. If two people (or three or four or whatever) decide to love each other and there is no coercion or manipulation or abuse or purposeful hurt involved, (things which are very prominent in heterosexual relationships, indeed, most relationships, romantic or not), then I don't think there is anything morally degrading about it, certainly not anything to deny them the right to exist and have media representation. There are sooooooo many dramas and films about heterosexual couples -- is this one episode of a show really that much of a threat?
Required fields are marked *
ladida
August 7, 2011 at 6:49 PM
Oh, I responded to CityHunter4ever's comment, just to avoid confusion.
Required fields are marked *
anotheraddict
August 7, 2011 at 10:47 PM
Thanks, Ladida~ you made a number of my points for me, and far more eloquently, I might add!
girl with tardis
August 7, 2011 at 8:52 PM
You: Awesome.
Required fields are marked *
Goyangi
August 8, 2011 at 11:22 AM
Beautiful response! Cosign.
Required fields are marked *
phoenixash
August 10, 2011 at 11:57 PM
You said exactly what I wanted to say, but accomplished it way more eloquently than I would have been able to muster. Bravo.
Required fields are marked *
ajbny
August 7, 2011 at 7:37 PM
I think you take it too far to suggest that because love is acceptable we should accept romantic relationships between siblings. however, I'm not strictly opposed to romantic relationships between siblings. The reason it is frowned upon is also biological but I think if they contracept all should be fine.
Required fields are marked *
Steamy Bun
August 7, 2011 at 8:07 PM
I actually agree with you, at least about there being no gene for homosexuality. Countless examples from real life have shown me that sexuality is fluid. It can change depending on a person's experience and circumstances. Some never question their sexuality and are faithfully one way or the other from birth to death, some have thoughts but don't act on them, some people change over a lifetime. As far as I'm concerned it IS just a mindset, a feeling, much stronger in some than others. But it's still not a choice. Why would someone choose a path that might make life horrible for them, unless denying their feelings would put them in even more pain?
Required fields are marked *
Kim Yoonmi
August 7, 2011 at 9:09 PM
But I tend to agree nature v. nature is NOT the issue here. If someone likes to ride a bike to work and someone likes to drive a car, it shouldn't matter to us which they prefer.
If one of the people was genetically more likely to like a bike than a car (though this is getting ridiculous) because their parents did the Tour of France and comes from that lineage, and you prefer a car like the majority, really, does it matter that the guy takes a bike to work because of genetics or not? He still has that right to ride his bike.
Besides which, arguing sexuality is 100% nature or 100% nurture really is downgrading the argument that human rights should be universal. It's ignoring the human part of the human rights--and making it a grand experiment instead. LGBTQ, then become the lab rats.
These days scientists argue over the 1% in either direction as if it were the chicken or the egg. Most scientists on either the social or the physical science side say that genetics is like the blue print for the house. But it doesn't mean that you will build exactly that house or that in 100 years that house will still look the same.
Where sexuality fits into that spectrum v. gender identity is yet to be determined and I'm fine with having it in absolute gray. Doesn't mean that if it goes either way there is less of a human rights issue.
As an adoptee, I'm kinda sick of the whole nature v. nurture. I get that all the time--shoved at me if I like it or not. Also the whole polarization that people learned from reading the Judeo Christian texts. The world isn't all black and whites like in Genesis, it's full of really pretty grays and all the other colors in between. (I should note I did read the whole thing. The whole Bible. Cover to cover, currently in 2.5 versions.)
When people ask me, "What are you?" "What nationality are you?" I answer human because they often forget to ask me about who I am first. Not what labels I carry.
I believe all people have that HUMAN right.
Required fields are marked *
Memlu
August 7, 2011 at 10:36 PM
"Besides which, arguing sexuality is 100% nature or 100% nurture really is downgrading the argument that human rights should be universal."
Yes, yes, YES. It doesn't and shouldn't matter whether someone is born queer or chooses to be queer or whatever; queerness is not what should be on trial here, but bigotry. Whether it's nature or nurture, cruelty and bigtory are not and cannot be justified. THAT is what is most important.
HN
August 10, 2011 at 3:50 AM
I also read the Bible cover to cover.
"Pretty grays" - did society teach you that also? What if it's a lie? Gray to who? Society? What if to God - it's black and white? God gave us a list of law, you either broke it, or not. Is anyone perfect? Can you claim that you were partially guilty in a court of law? If it doesn't fly in a man-made judicial system full of flaws, would God accept it?
That's what the old testament is - to show us God's standard for perfection and show us that we all fell short. When we recognize sinful behaviors and call it for what it is, it might leads us to repentance and asking for His mercy - His free gift of salvation to all mankind.
That's what the discussion ultimately boils down to - do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? If you believe, are you willing to stand by it regardless of what society says? If God calls adultery, murder, homosexuality a sin, do you call it a sin too? And God calls us to love - do you love everyone as yourself? God calls us to confront people of their sins, do we do that too? Either believe it, or don't believe it, don't try to mold the Bible into what society says, and don't reduce it of its power. The truth is inconvenient, but it has to be told, because it's what Christians are called to do.
Regarding human rights, what are human rights? Who gave you human rights? Other humans? Who should uphold those rights? If you trust that into the hands of other humans, you're in really bad shape because those changes all the time, and most of the time, for the worst. It's when people thinks they have power over others that they misuse and take advantage of others for their own gain. If you trust that into your own hand then each person have a different definition of what those rights mean and this conversation shouldn't exist because one's definition of right would be that all humans have the right to steal from another person, kill if necessary, so that they can advance themselves. Are there not people with this kind of twisted mind - who can tell them that they are wrong? The question is: What are the foundational rights that can't be violated? Who says? Since people today does not know where the ultimate source of power and authority lies, no wonder why our world is so confused, and discussions like this continues...
phoenixash
August 11, 2011 at 12:21 AM
This comment is in reply to HN...
As someone who was raised Christian and is now struggling with her religious identity, I have a hard time reconciling the idea of God (love and acceptance) and the condemnation of homosexuality. I don't understand why homosexuality is wrong. Most of the Bible is totally understandable in a Golden Law way- you don't murder because you don't want anyone killing you. You respect your parents because you hope to in turn receive that respect when you have children one day. But being in a gay relationship is a private decision between two individuals, and, as mentioned above, what's the problem as long as it's consensual? It's not making anyone else's life any worse.
Is it because of the people offended by gay public displays of affection? Well, I don't really enjoy watching a heterosexual couple stick their tongues down each other's throats either, but they have the right to do so. I don't much like seeing guys with their boxers hanging out of their pants or girls with too tight, borderline vulgar clothing, but sometimes you just don't agree with other people's lifestyles and learn to live with it. I don't see how being gay is any different.
I also couldn't help but notice that the end of your comment reads as saying, "the answer to this question is so obvious we shouldn't even need to discuss it." Excuse me if i interpreted you wrong, but I think we should *always* be having a discussion, especially when it pertains to issues of morality. It may be ugly in some people's eyes, but these hard questions *need* to be brought up, otherwise we'd never advance as a society. If we never looked at racial problems in America, there might still be slaves. If we didn't look at traditional gender values, women might not work or vote. It's never a good idea to just sweep these things under the rug, no matter what your stance is.
HN
August 10, 2011 at 2:57 AM
The point of the post is: It's a choice, and should not be masked as no-choice, which I agree to completely. Even in the case of race - mixed - they still choose which race they id with. Their decision to id with one race or another doesn't make them "born that way". I hate the fact that lies about "being born that way" are propagated. It's a choice, and people - live with that choice.
Regarding question about pain: Why choose to commit adultery? Isn't that in the name of love and follow your heart also? How about choosing (either by circumstances, etc.) to become prostitutes? There are many things human does that brings them more pain than happiness, whether it's via their own choosing or "have to" because of life. That doesn't make it a good decision, and doesn't make it acceptable. Does that mean we should hate them? No. We should love them and help them to make the right choices. Advocating such behaviors, such as what society is following, is giving heroine to an addict. If you love them so much that you don't want to see them suffer through withdrawal, and give them heroine, go ahead. I'm saying that there are people who loves in a different way - that they would rather see the person first goes through pain, then heal. These people doesn't deserve to be called bigots. If you are so open to having GLBT on TV, then why are you so narrow minded to others having different views?
Now if you are going to call me a bigot, ask yourself: Why must it be between "consenting adults"? Who define the term "adult"? Historically, people get married as young as 13. Why is love between an adult and someone younger than 18 wrong? Who gives you the right to say that? Society?
That's why these kind of discussions are pointless because people doesn't have a standard to measure their opinions on. If they don't believe in a universal truth and just makes exceptions for whatever the rest of society starts to say is acceptable, soon, their standards fall even faster than they can say "would not happen". I strongly believe that "Universal truth is not measured in mass appeal". If you don't know where to find the universal truth, and base it in an ultimate source of power and authority, you don't have the power to say that your opinion is more valid than another, and you don't have the power to condemn because you are not that source of power, neither is society, nor the power in number of people agreeing with you. Right is right, and wrong is wrong. Wrong doesn't become right with more people agreeing with the wrong.
Required fields are marked *
HN
August 19, 2011 at 1:52 AM
phoenixash: I think you missed most of my points. The main idea is this: humans can't compare our standards to other humans - who's to say that yours is right or mine is right? Who ultimately has the authority? Can you pinpoint the answer? Can you give me a never changing standard? It's because people doesn't know who/want to listen to for moral authority that there are problems. Are not discussions involving human standards and opinions ends up being discussion leading nowhere and is pointless? If it's only relying on human, the majority/louder ones are usually the winner, so it's already confirmed and it is ever changing. Once the opposing side is silenced into submission, that's all it takes for a human discussion to have a winner.
Personally, I say that my Creator has the right to determine what I should do and what I shouldn't. He said so, and I trust Him, and I know that I will answer to Him, so if my puny brain can't understand His, is that His fault? My Creator should be the one to decide right or wrong - not me. If we can't depend on a higher authority than ourselves, I don't see how one opinion can overcome another besides just basing it on majority vs. minority, and/or peer pressuring a group into silence, but then, the majority/pressuring group - do they really have authority?
Did I ever say to sweep these stuff under the rug? However, I do believe that we are battling spiritual stuff and instead of focusing on gay rights, I would like to ask questions and raise observations in hope someone reading this out there might think about what is the ultimate source of authority in their life? Is the majority a good source of authority? Where their opinions come from? The sources that formed their opinions, is it valid and non-contradictory? Is it a double standard? Will it change? Are they open to seeing a different view? Are they open to challenging and struggling with their views? I would like people to focus on the spiritual battle that we are engaged in, as well the eternal outlook on living our lives so that we are not deceived by arguments but to clearly understand. Ultimately, if you are serious in answering these root issues, you will come to investigate God, and that's what I want people to do - to spend time reasoning with Him. Isn't eternity worth an investigation? You'll not benefit anything if you throw your opinions out there - it's His - the one that you'll be answering to - that is important.
Regarding your problems with reconciling between a God of love and the gay issue, do you have problems with Him being a God of love and hating sin also? Please think about the reason for this question and think about all implications.
I pray that you will continue to struggle in your religious identity and will overcome it, because something will either get wounded, to a point of death, or something beautiful can be born, only out of a struggle. I pray you will take it seriously because it will determine an eternal destiny.
I will not be visiting these posts anymore because I've said all that's needed. I hope that people will try to understand what is written and not your biased view/interpretation of what is written. If you have honest answers to my questions, and did your investigations, feel free to form your own opinions/convictions. I hope people will heed my questions and come to convince themselves thoroughly of their answers.
Memlu
August 7, 2011 at 10:31 PM
As a queer woman who struggled for years to accept her sexuality -- specifically, my romantic and sexual attraction to women -- largely because of people telling me it was impossible for me to have been born queer, I would have found it deeply helpful and indeed inspiring to have seen a show such as this when I was younger, something that would have supported me and told me that I was not wrong or strange or confused as, it seemed, everyone I knew was telling me. Sexuality is a complex affair; like many things, it is influenced both by society and culture and by genetics, and it can be and often is fluid. Anything that offers a light to people who have been hurt and who are, as I was, afraid of themselves is a good thing. I am very, very glad that this drama exists, and I hope very much so that it is subtitled so that I might watch it. Hooray for queer representation!
Additionally: two consenting adults engaging in consensual romantic or sexual activity on an equal standing is inherently dissimilar to incest (which frequently involves a major power imbalance), pedophilia (which is entirely unrelated to queer sexualities being as it concerns the sexual attraction to CHILDREN), bestiality (which is also unrelated to queer sexualities because it involves ANIMALS), or any of the many cruel and frankly illogical arguments people like to throw out to defend their bigotry. There is no slippery slope here. My wanting to marry a woman I love does not mean people are going to run around marrying dogs or children next. I do not want to marry a dog. Queer people don't want to have sex with children. It isn't the same thing. You cannot conflate these things; to do so is disingenuous.
I very, very strongly recommend that you do a great deal of reading on these issues, as there is much that you can learn. If nothing else, perhaps in learning you can offer greater sympathy to others.
Required fields are marked *
Dav
August 8, 2011 at 4:09 PM
Very well said.
I'm also hoping that we'll see more representation of queer people where their sexuality is not a "special" thing; I don't mind queerness being a plot point, but sometimes I'd also like to see leads that are incidentally queer, the same way they're incidentally music nerds or doctors or clumsy - an aspect of their personality and not the defining characteristic. I was heartened to see some lesbian-undertoned joking in I Need Romance this year. (Very, very mild, but still there, and not followed by denigration.)
Required fields are marked *
phoenixash
August 11, 2011 at 12:45 AM
An admirable example of this "incidental queerness" is in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. One of the main characters, Willow, eventually discovers that she's a lesbian after 4 seasons. But she's many things besides that- she's Jewish, she's a nerd, she's shy and awkward, and incidentally, she's a witch. But there's so much that defines her character besides her sexuality, and it doesn't even play a role until she's been firmly established as a character. It was a great thing to watch unfold on TV over the years, since "lesbian" was not her sole identity.
Unless you were talking only about kdramas, in which case, feel free to ignore me.
naturescall
August 8, 2011 at 2:26 AM
cityhunter4ever: I agree. and as u said, since when did "love" translate to "sex" ?? who said two guys or two girls can't love each other?? it's just against nature to try to have sexual intercourse!
Required fields are marked *
llalicon
August 8, 2011 at 10:11 AM
First off, I want to commend your professionalism when dealing with this topic.
Second, I think you're looking at this too literally. No one is ever going to condone bestiality or incest or anything like that if they're going to accept homosexuality. Those things are extremely different, and it's a bit ignorant to think that they even belong in the same category.
I think the point the writers were making in Coffee Prince and Sungkyunkwan Scandal was that you don't have to be limited to one sexuality. The hero of Coffee Prince said that it didn't matter if the heroine was a woman or an alien. The whole point is love whoever you want to love. In those shows, neither of the heroes looked at men the same way they looked at the heroine they thought was a man. They only had eyes for who they loved. "Gay" and "straight" are only labels.
Questioning one's sexuality does not lead to a decision. It leads to an epiphany. Most of the time, people don't want to be homosexual because most of society says it's wrong. They can repress their thoughts for long in life. They are allowed to be confused about what their heart wants and what their brain wants to want. If it were a decision, why would they pick a sexuality that is always under fire?
Required fields are marked *
Keiki55
August 8, 2011 at 11:34 AM
@cityhunter4ever...I agree with you...however it the society that we live in that is expecting of any type of love that people have even though half the things that they are professing to love is morally wrong...and people are going to contiune to do the whatever the heck they want; afterall we live in a "free society ".... We are not the final judges to judge anyone, for we all have to be judge ourselves..
Required fields are marked *
Chocobo
August 9, 2011 at 6:09 AM
I think it is important to point out that genes are not everything, nor does the apparent absence of a "Gay Gene" automatically mean that homosexuality is not biological.
First of all, many traits are manifested from the confluence of many genes, not just one. Things like your eye color and blood type are determined by one gene that one can point to. But other traits are determined by many genes, not just the absence or presence of one. To further complicate the matter, researchers now have found that genes can be turned "on" and "off" through the external and internal environment of the body.
But let's say for the sake of argument that genes are not involved in homosexuality at all. People have put too much stock in genetics, and not enough in development. The overwhelming majority of homosexual people report feeling attraction to the same sex at extremely early ages, far before they can comprehend what "gay", or indeed, "sexuality" at all, is.
So even if the reason is not inherently "genetic", it still may have come from pre-natal, post-natal, and early childhood development, which would include physical, biological changes to the body. This would preclude a choice -- meaning that their feelings have already developed without their conscience decision. Not everything about a person is predetermined by genes -- much of it is effected by development far after the genes have been donated. For example: Two centuries ago, white Westerners in the New World were barely over 5 feet tall. But with better nutrition in the general population, the average person is now closer to six feet tall, around 5'9" for men. That has nothing to do with genetic changes and everything to do with environmental changes: better medicine, better diet. You can see the same thing happening with taller and growing populations in wealthy, growing Asian countries.
And so I take issue with the labeling of either "genetic" or "choice." Even if it is not genetic, in my mind that does not mean that homosexuality is not still biologically based and unchangeable. It is unfortunate that a gross oversimplification of the interaction of genes and environment has left the debate over homosexuality so dichotomous.
And let's face it, with all the hatred and discrimination they have to put up with, who, if actually given the choice, would ever choose to be gay? There are almost no social or economic incentives to be so: homosexuals face judgement, harassment, physical and emotional harm, and being ostracized from their closest friends and family.
Required fields are marked *
offended
August 9, 2011 at 6:04 PM
CityHunter4ever...completely agree and I also stand w/ the mothers against the gay/sex agenda.
Required fields are marked *
Mist
August 9, 2011 at 11:56 PM
Agree~
Required fields are marked *
Mfon
January 20, 2015 at 2:56 AM
Brilliant answer. They claim being gay is genetic and not a choice/decision they make, I have wondered how come the gay-gene advocates have not presented us with apes or monkeys,(since the scientist say these are man's closest evolutionary relatives) who are homosexual or lesbians. Please put gay monkeys or apes on display to show that this is something wired from the gene. I wish these people would stop trying to justify themselves by shoving their choices down other peoples throat. its their choice not mine therefore let them keep their choices to themselves and stop trying to force other people to become like them. it is just like a smoker puffing his cigarette smoke in the face of a non-smoker. it is downright WRONG. Keep your smoke in your own lungs. I really do sympathise with people who are afflicted with this craving because of the hate they face but since it is a choice they make, they should be able to live with the repulsion such aberration evokes. I cringe at the thought of poor innocent children whose mind are forced to accept this aberration they claim to be love.
Required fields are marked *
9 jahe
August 7, 2011 at 2:35 PM
i am not against lesbian or gay, and the story seems really worth about, but i honestly understand why it can't be aired on television. as i live in the same situation country that will ban (or any term related) this kind of story.
Required fields are marked *
10 Jaeminuf
August 7, 2011 at 2:46 PM
The Drama Special sounds interesting. Just voicing my support, lest powers that be keep track of international audience response.
Required fields are marked *
11 Eleven11
August 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM
Awesome! And respect to you JB, for not just chucking the undecided character in the bisexual category. Happens way too often.
I hope someone subs this and i can get a hold of it.
Required fields are marked *
12 diorama
August 7, 2011 at 2:56 PM
I'm glad they chose to portray the characters as three-dimensional people instead of 'oh-look-the-Lesbians'. It will probably help to have relatable characters with relatable conflicts, with just a different orientation. It gives them depth and drama.
Required fields are marked *
13 kukkoo
August 7, 2011 at 3:32 PM
i don't see a problem a woman loving a woman and the same with gays. i have so many gay friends and i love them for who they are.
i really salute the writer/producer/directors of this special for taking the risk and accepting the backlash for airing this drama. the topic itself is very sensitive and i understand parents having problems with this, but the world is changing and so people should accept it too even though its hard and long process.
Required fields are marked *
14 [email protected]
August 7, 2011 at 3:38 PM
Han Go-eun
Required fields are marked *
15 Aya
August 7, 2011 at 3:40 PM
why hasn't this post been taken over by the Daughters of Bible Club already?
Where are the "What's Up" people talking about "What's Up" because they want "What's Up"?
So, we're actually gonna talk about what jb's written here?
wow, the end is nigh
Required fields are marked *
Aya
August 7, 2011 at 3:40 PM
whatever.
History is repeating itself, let's not forget what happened to Life is Beautiful around the same time last year.
Expect angry ads in major korean newspapers and drop in ratings, KBS.
oh, and most likely one of the Ministries of Korea will have a say about this.
Required fields are marked *
16 [email protected]
August 7, 2011 at 3:40 PM
Offtopic, but I think Kim So Yeon and Han Go-eun should be in a drama together, kind of like Iris and Athena but they are the lead instead.
Required fields are marked *
17 yellow
August 7, 2011 at 3:44 PM
hooray! whatever makes you happy!
Required fields are marked *
18 oddworld
August 7, 2011 at 3:48 PM
does anyone know why in Korean movies there's tons of explicit sex scenes and in dramas they treat even kissing as something extremely taboo?
like, are they conservative or not?
Required fields are marked *
dee
August 7, 2011 at 4:41 PM
haha. good point!
Required fields are marked *
malta
August 7, 2011 at 8:43 PM
I wonder that too! The sex scenes in American movies are numerous and obviously gratuitous, but they tend to be pretty low key as in not shocking. You know, like *[enter generic sex scene]* continue with the plot... but the one's in Korean films are SO explicit. Rated R Korean films would be rated NC 17 in the U.S. hands down, without a doubt... The difference between Korean Dramas and Korean films is ridiculous and leaves me confused.
Required fields are marked *
Kim Yoonmi
August 7, 2011 at 9:22 PM
It's the difference in audience. The average drama is airing on *public* television. For those in America, it would be like having Sesame Street and then PBS playing explicit sex next.
The cable networks are less conservative. If you watch I Need Romance and Hyena, you'll see a ton more sex scenes, some of them a bit explicit too. ^.~ (They play after 10 in Korea and during a weekday.)
MBC, KBS, SBS are all on public television. They play for mostly the ajumma crowd that cleans the apartment/house while watching. So she might be wiping the linoleum floor while watching a drama. And she likes how it is slightly repetitive because if she misses something she doesn't miss much. This is why historicals and slower-paced dramas tend to be in midday slots. Those Ajumma also might have a younger child with them, parked in front of the TV while they clean.... having a three year old watch two adults strip clothes isn't that good, right? Also you can have friends over, chat a little in between and so on, but still not miss much.
BUT the movie is private, you can choose it and sometimes ship the kid off to another movie if they are old enough. Snuggle up to the husband, etc.
The majority of drama watchers are women in Korea. So if you keep that in mind, you have your answer.
The Korean way of watching a drama is very different from the American. Also the Korean way of watching a movie tends to be lots more intense.
Required fields are marked *
malta
August 7, 2011 at 9:50 PM
Thanks for the explanation! :)
One of the first things I loved about kdramas was their emphasis on relationships as opposed to sex. I once heard a quote that said something like "today, stories want to talk about and portray love, but instead they end up showing sex."... also that "today's stories want to talk about death, but instead just show violence"...the quote was way more eloquent than that, but I felt it really described American television well.
The intensity of Korean movies, specifically thrillers or dramas, is too much for me. I always feel so drained afterwards. I haven't seen many, but the one's I've seen tend to have "unhappy," tragic or ambiguous endings.
Required fields are marked *
Kim Yoonmi
August 8, 2011 at 5:38 PM
There are a few lighter-ended movies, but you just need to know what you're looking for. The thing is that because of the upheaval in Korea, a lot of the melodramas and sad movies tend to be more popular. But some Korean movies also look at the relationship of love. Some are really funny and cute, such as Baby and Me with Jang Geun Seok (You must have seen YAB, if you didn't, you need to. It's required watching around here.)
Try these on for size: Please Teach me English, The Beast and the Beauty, Arahan, 100 Days with Mr. Arrogant, Love so Divine, Reversal of Fortune.
Also if you want to watch movies with a similar theme to this episode: Bungee Jumping of Their Own and The King and the Clown. Though Bungee Jumping of their own is kind of a mind screw. (Not as much as some other K-movies.)
Upside to Korean movies is that you often can bring the boyfriend or husband with you to watch and they won't feel ashamed. There is less polarization between sexes on K-movies, unlike American films.
The drama Romance is Zero also surprisingly dealt with transvestitism too. (Which is separate from sexuality--though that doesn't prevent people from mixing it up by accident or purpose.)
Intersexuality is being dealt with surprisingly well on J-dramas--IS - Otoko Demo Onna Demo Nai Sei. But J-dramas have a tendency to often deal with issues that the larger society tends to ignore and continue the dislike anyway since Japanese media is used more as a release than Korean media. So sometimes Japanese media will show bubble cultures that aren't really accepted in the larger society--which is why homosecuality will be shown in dramas, but usually only if it idealizes it for the female aesthetic. (which, frankly, isn't much better since it's still making homosexuality an object rather than a right.) Taiwanese media also allowed Hana Kimi which kind of surprised me. One of the characters in that is openly gay (The doctor). Chinese media tends to be more conservative.
19 ar_arguably romantic
August 7, 2011 at 4:24 PM
I'm glad that not all responses in korea are negative regarding this drama special and I'm glad that a broadcast station is actually airing it. This gives me hope that korea is moving forward a little bit on this subject.
Required fields are marked *
20 diy
August 7, 2011 at 4:47 PM
i too have nothing against homosexuality. but i understand if there are part of the public who against it, for many reason, culture, religion. and i respect that, cause i too live in a country much more conservative than s korea. tho i feel bad for the actress to put their effort solely base on professionalism.
i guess there will come a time where ppl starts to accept homosexuality in the society and on media, until then just bear with it.
Required fields are marked *
21 Bijing
August 7, 2011 at 4:59 PM
Most asian countries are conservative...but it doesn't alter the fact that times have changed.We have to embrace the truth that homosexuality is now accepted.Almost all korean dramas show people drinking soju,isn't drinking bad ? Then why continue showing it in every drama? Does being a homosexual hurt anybody?it is now a part of society..people shld stop being hypocrites...
Required fields are marked *
22 sup super supper
August 7, 2011 at 5:23 PM
Sounds like a lovely program. I hope it's allowed a fair chance.
Required fields are marked *
23 Princess
August 7, 2011 at 5:27 PM
javascript:EmoticonPalette.selectEmoticon('03');
Required fields are marked *
24 bd
August 7, 2011 at 5:45 PM
Eh, what's the big deal?
It's a story-line for a 1-ep drama; if people don't care for it, they just don't have to watch it (plenty of other programming).
Required fields are marked *
25 mary
August 7, 2011 at 5:59 PM
So how was Han Go Eun's acting? She was amazing in Man Called God and judging from your stills, she managed to look different from her 'sexy spy' character in AMCG.
I wonder why she doesn't have a lot of dramas...
Required fields are marked *
26 imoan.naomi
August 7, 2011 at 6:03 PM
I've always wondered why people LOVE to watch cross-dressing girls romance boys, but not actual gay couples onscreen. Coffee Prince, Sung Kyun Kwan Scandal, Hanazakari no Kimitachi e, Ouran High School Host Club, etc are all hugely popular stories, but everyone wants to kick up a fuss when a legitimate same sex couple is portrayed on tv. All of a sudden the idea is dangerous. So hypocritical!
Required fields are marked *
peony
August 7, 2011 at 7:41 PM
lol.
ikr? it's like--people like the hint of homosexuality... but not the actual thing!
also, have you noticed that lots of fanclubs like to pair or 'ship' members inside of a girl group or a boy group together? I'm pretty sure those shippings are gay too... lol.
i think it's all kinda amusing.
Required fields are marked *
imoan.naomi
August 7, 2011 at 9:03 PM
Yes, your comment reminded me of the fanfic in You're Beautiful (the love triangle between the three guys), and just same-sex idol skinship in general. I mean, they even call it "fan service" for crying out loud. Let's be honest people, do you want to see "the gay" or don't you?
I think it's a giant conspiracy for networks/society/fandom/ etc to say we'll accept your homosexuality so long as you pretend it isn't real.
Required fields are marked *
peony
August 8, 2011 at 8:41 PM
what they want is.... straight guys to act gay and real gay guys to act straight. :P
Required fields are marked *
Steamy Bun
August 7, 2011 at 8:15 PM
gah, that bugs me too. So much! Imagine how much MORE groundbreaking and awesome Coffee Prince might have been if Eun Chan really had been a guy. : )
Required fields are marked *
conan
August 8, 2011 at 8:46 AM
The comments for this article are so juicy and meaty! I'm at a lost for words because a lot of things have been discussed, so I suppose it'll be a waste of time and space is I were to comment on something that has already been said.
Well, from my own personal humble opinion, I think KBS made a right decision to air this drama. Finally a drama depicting fully on homosexuality, not the pseudo kind. I'm all up for world peace and all, and this might be one small step for homosexuals, one giant leap for world peace. Does that makes sense? Or is it the other way around? Or, err, I'm confused myself.
One netizen comment that had me banging my head on the wall is "This drama is a crime against humanity", from the Allkpop version of the article. Why is this a crime? I think a crime against humanity will be, oh I don't know, somewhere around homicide and terrorism. I don't know why homosexuality is a bad thing. Sure some people may think it's not the ideal, but is it a crime? As long as no one else is harmed physically, psychologically, or emotionally, then homosexuality is not a crime. Heck, after stating that, doesn't that make homophobes criminals? Having different values are okay, but let's not call anything or anyone different from us as criminals or treating them any different.
Phew, I'm just rambling on here. I think I should stop. As an end note, I'd love to watch this drama! It would be nice to see lesbians living a normal life and (hopefully) really telling their story and problems.
Oh and by the way, has anyone noticed that among the handful of movies/dramas depicting homosexuality, a majority of them are of gays and not lesbians? Something to ponder about.
Required fields are marked *
conan
August 8, 2011 at 8:48 AM
Whoops! This was supposed to be another separate comment, why was it here? Err, pardon me.
Required fields are marked *
27 Leisel
August 7, 2011 at 6:07 PM
I personally do believe that though homosexuality has not proven to be genetic It should be accepted. Unless I'm mistaken, no one decides who they are attracted. Homosexuality is a part of nature, when an area becomes too populated, animals choose same gender mates. Anyway, I hope the special gets a fair chance.
Required fields are marked *
28 chmebu
August 7, 2011 at 6:40 PM
homosexuality is a choice... and the choices of anyone should be respected.
HOWEVER, it does not change the fact that
it's an abomination to God, and He is the judge.
so it's really up to the person's decision whether he is in the Lord's side or not.
hating, and grudging at one another is also sin and those that do these things are guilty also.
i hate homosexuality because it is not of God's, but I do not condemn those who are homosexual.
Only they can do that to themselves. Everyone, whether they are homosexual or not will face the judgement. No one can say they are not guilty of sin.
i don't mind if people criticize my comments. i wrote this without evil thoughts in mind, and to encourage others not to chose homosexuality...instead to TRY to walk a clean life, abiding in God's words.
Required fields are marked *
lee
August 7, 2011 at 6:57 PM
did you even read the "let’s keep the comments even-keel and insults to a minimum, yes?" Read : no negative comments!!!!
Required fields are marked *
befair
August 7, 2011 at 7:19 PM
So because she has the unpopular opinion (in a more tolerant online community) against homosexuality, her comment is negative? She wasn't insulting anyone in particular and was just stating her opinion, its not fair to call that negative.
I mean I almost entirely disagree with her but I don't think its fair of you to try and take away her right to say what she believes because its "negative" in your eyes.
Required fields are marked *
peony
August 7, 2011 at 7:36 PM
haha, yeah. i agree it's just her opinion. i'm actually really really happy and impressed that aalll the comments on here are so civil and cuss-free :P
Required fields are marked *
Kasie J.
August 8, 2011 at 4:29 AM
I think Lee might be referring to the fact that chmebu called homosexuality an "abomination." That word itself has a very negative connotation, there are other ways you can say that you're against homosexuality.
Why was it so hard to write, "I'm against homosexuality because of my religion." Or something like that? Did chmebu really find it necessary to use such a negative word? When I think of the word "abomination", I envision monsters--the very last thing I want to compare my gay friends to.
You can believe what you believe and have your opinions but there are certain ways you should express that. You have to understand not everyone is religious or even believes in God and what doesn't seem offensive to you actually can be incredibly offensive to others.
General rule? If you can't say something nice, don't say it at all.
Required fields are marked *
Zoe
August 7, 2011 at 8:19 PM
Ummm, I see what you're saying in calling homosexuality an abomination to God and such, but I do believe that only He knows what He abhors.
Even though you don't condemn them (I truly, emphatically applaud you on that, by the way), you are also stating that they are not on "the Lord's side". The Lord, as he taught, loves all of His children. You also said that He is the Judge, which is true. Taking that one step further, it must also be said that we silly humans have no right to call others' paths "clean" while finding the rest distasteful.
It might sound like I'm scolding you or something (I really don't want to come off that way), but I just think that you should remember that God judges us and we are discouraged to judge each other.
Required fields are marked *
melonhead
August 7, 2011 at 10:30 PM
I think He tells us what he abhors too though, in the Bible, so it's not like we're just making up standards to judge others by.
And even though He loves his children, it doesn't stop Him from hating what they are doing. Just like how a parent can hate that their child is getting caught up in drugs, and doesn't want them to continue, but still loves them nonetheless. And because they love their child they want what they know to be better for them.
Just food for thought ^^
Required fields are marked *
Kasie J.
August 8, 2011 at 4:17 AM
Did just equate doing drugs with love between people of the same sex?! O_O I don't know how you made that leap but the Bible shouldn't always be so strictly regarded as the truth otherwise we have this: http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-2945.html
Just food for thought. ^_^
Required fields are marked *
Rachael
August 8, 2011 at 11:32 AM
Pointing out that, while God is considered infallible, man is not and man wrote the Bible. So the Bible can very well have fallacies. Especially since there have been many different versions throughout the ages.
Required fields are marked *
Kim Yoonmi
August 8, 2011 at 6:00 PM
Letting you know that the weight with homosexuality is talked in the Bible is low compared to other issues that have often been advocated for in the modern-day.
There was far more talk of sister marriages (where there was polygamy between sisters), how to keep slaves, cleanliness, and how to give God his sacrifice. The majority of the passages cited by Christians are in fact Old Testament, which is ironic because it's the New testament that often throws out the entire sections of the Old Testament out.
Corinthians, cited by *some* Christians to condemn homosexuality ironically throws out Leviticus and narrows down the field down to what was a few hundred commandments to ten. Yet Christians cite both as somehow valid, despite the text saying to ignore more of Leviticus as invalid in Christian belief system. In addition, Corinthians was referring to pedophilia as being wrong, which further throws out much of Leviticus. (the section about a father being able to marry his daughter... ellllleeeewwwww.... Good job Paul!)
Also states things like the separation of the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of man, where man should judge acts of wrong in court, but the soul is judged by God alone. John, while contradicting Paul tends to agree with that famous quote, Do not Judge lest ye be Judged.
The other sections referred to are Psalms, in which the person wasn't wicked for being homosexual, but for cheating, swindling and being cruel to his people, which caused the tower of babel to fall.
Then you have Sodom and Gomorrah, but have you read that section to the end? Lot was hardly an angel. He turned his daughters over for rape, ended up being raped, and his wife was turned into salt without warning. Plus the giant plot hole of the angels not getting out of the city... and it was Old Testament, not new testament.
Also people have used the Bible to kill Native Americans, declare slavery is the best institution and that whites are superior to any other race. (Despite the fact that Adam and Eve most likely weren't white. Fertile Crescent is the most likely setting for that... and those people aren't white.) The Bible also says that the devil can use the Bible for the work of the Devil.
How do I know this? 'cause I actually sat down and read the thing cover to cover to get a sense of the larger stories involved, currently in 2.5 versions of it. Have you? Or did you only listen to your preacher, which, BTW, was against the starting of Protestantism, which moved for the average person to be able to read The Bible. (though they originally added witches and other crap to it. King James not being God by a long shot.) Sit and read it. You'll find that homosexuality is weighted very little and there is nothing explicit that says that people who are homosexual will burn in hell like the modern-day anti-homosexual evangelical preacher (though some sects do allow it).
The Bible, if anything shows the fallibility of the human being in the face of God. Since God clearly has given women and slaves some slack since we now think it is wrong not to give those rights, perhaps homosexuality, which was weighted much less in the Bible to begin with should also be given some slack. Because, clearly, I really like wearing red in my hanbok and clean-shaved men on K-dramas. (Leviticus) And I like the option of my serial monogamy.
Required fields are marked *
phasere
August 8, 2011 at 6:48 PM
"Yet Christians cite both as somehow valid, despite the text saying to ignore more of Leviticus as invalid in Christian belief system."
The point Paul was trying to make in Corinthians (similar to what Jesus Himself said when he boiled down the Ten Commandments to only two) is NOT to ignore all the OT stuff, but to live by a law of LOVE and not LEGALISM. Christians believe that God is a relational and intimate God, not one who merely sets down rules and expects people to follow blindly. Think of it like 2 friends - because the friends love each other, they're not going to do things that hurt the other person on purpose, right? In the same way Christians strive to NOT do things that God despises NOT because of a set of rules, but because of a genuine desire to please Him and be more like Him. Intent and attitude is the main focus here.
It doesn't matter how "little" the Bible mentions homosexuality - the bottom line is that the Bible says it is wrong in the eyes of God. This is a statement of fact and not an attempt to shove religion down anyone's throat.
marisa
August 7, 2011 at 9:02 PM
I really worry about people who seem to think they can speak for their gods.
You realize this is about a k-drama, right?
No need to get all doom and gloom, dear.
Required fields are marked *
Memlu
August 7, 2011 at 10:40 PM
Speaking as a queer Christian woman: I see absolutely no reason why I should respect an "opinion" that refuses to respect my existence. You cannot argue something as a "fact" (and by arguing that popular Judeo-Christian disavowment of queer identities and sexualities is fact, you are ignoring the reality that is this: most people in the world do not subscribe to a Judeo-Christian faith, and it is hugely inappropriate to demand or presume that they do) and then turn around and claim it is only an opinion so as to escape criticism.
Cruelty is cruelty, no matter if it is okayed by a religious figure or by the law or by a majority of people.
Required fields are marked *
olsen
August 8, 2011 at 5:48 AM
I agree with chmebu.
One of my best friends is gay. Do I love him less? No. But, do I accept his life style? No. He understands that there are certain things that I cannot accept because of my faith. He still tells me everything, yes, I help him out with his 'boy problems' whenever my help is needed. But, he totally accepts that I won't be protesting on the streets fighting for gay rights.
He is his own person and I cannot tell him what to do or who to be with. At the same time, it would be unfair of him to force me to accept his choice (which he doesn't).
As for the Bible, I believe that what is written is what it means to say. There is no such thing as, 'this chapter and verse shall remain the truth till this and that''. What is written is final.
Required fields are marked *
Kim Yoonmi
August 8, 2011 at 6:15 PM
Women shall not wear red during their menses? How about the contradictions about how Jesus was born? Men shall not cut their hair... and you can't leave alms for lepers unless it's at your doorstep. Men can and cannot marry their daughters.
We can't have our smoothed-chested men in the shower with their clean cuts. TT My Korean drama obsession would die then. Especially if we can't watch them shower.
Oh and art is also an abomination against God if it doesn't depict him. (a previous Christian belief and a strict one.)
By this logic, then K-dramas are a sin against the Bible. Because the art doesn't really depict God in a positive light. It makes idols out of our hotties. And we worship them. Hyun Binnie~~~ *drool* I'm sure some of us even have shrines..... *cough*
Seriously, if you're going to use the Bible, at least read the entire thing in a modern version of your language. And not double translated from KJV, which is inferior.
Oh, and in case you're wondering--I also read the Ramayana, several Buddhist and Shinto texts, plus a bunch of Muist texts too. Give me what you got.
Required fields are marked *
tina
August 9, 2011 at 4:22 AM
*slow applause* dude you took everything i wanted to say to that comment and i was incoherent by the end. it always bugged me when people used the bible against who i am as a person.
Required fields are marked *
espresso
August 8, 2011 at 9:31 AM
wow, thank you.
you said exactly what i wanted to say.
Required fields are marked *
Rachael
August 8, 2011 at 11:36 AM
Actually, homosexuality, or more specifically being homosexual, is not considered an abomination, but the actual act. So according to the Bible they'd be loved no less than anyone else who commits sin.
Required fields are marked *
Rachael
August 8, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Since I asked below, seems only fair to ask you too. Does this mean you're against women cutting their hair, tattoos, or consuming shellfish? As those are other things that the Bible is against.
Required fields are marked *
29 monsterlover
August 7, 2011 at 6:47 PM
ooh i want to so watch this
i'm always arguing on this topic because i believe
everyone is equal doesn't matter background, race or sexuality :D
Required fields are marked *
30 ricky the royal highness
August 7, 2011 at 6:56 PM
I think it's important for us to be open-minded. Like what some people commented, art is art, regardless of the subject matter.
I am raised in a somewhat conservative country, however I am never taught to hate. We've got enough hate going on in this world, can't we just accept and love? Even if you disagree, don't punish or persecute.
As a teacher, I agree completely that the mass media plays a mammoth part in influencing our younger generation. However I can't stand it if a homosexual/effeminate/tomboyish student gets bullied! It saddens me and it makes me guilty because I can't help but feel as though I'm a failure as an educator. So I do feel that the young and even the society needs to be educated. A certain awareness is needed to make sure that when we DO disagree about homosexuality, then we won't go around bashing or disrespecting other human beings.
Kudos for proper and tasteful portrayal of homosexuality in movies and dramas. And kudos for people who disagree but are never hateful and always respectful :)
In any case, this is the first time I've heard of Drama Specials. What is it actually? Does it have several short episodes or just a single long episode?
What are some of the past Drama Specials? I wish to watch some and educate myself. Please and thank you.
Required fields are marked *
me
August 7, 2011 at 7:23 PM
Drama Specials are short (usually one episode drama) that tells basically a story like an hour movie. in other words it's like a tv movie aired on KBS, if you watch KBSW they usually airs every friday.
I wouldn't say it's long, more like a one episode long. but some actually have few episodes (ROCKROCKROCK is an example, it has 4 episodes)
others past drama specials are like pianist, the great gye-choon bin and our slightly risque relationship)
Required fields are marked *
ricky the royal highness
August 7, 2011 at 7:35 PM
Ahh, I see. I watched 2 episodes of Rock Rock Rock myself but I never knew that it was a Special. Now I'm gonna google the other titles you mentioned, me.
Thank you very much :)
Required fields are marked *
me
August 7, 2011 at 7:40 PM
you're welcome. JB actually recapped great gye choo-bin and our slightly risque relationship) she tagged them in this post.
Required fields are marked *
ricky the royal highness
August 7, 2011 at 7:56 PM
Aigoo, how could I missed that?!
Both recaps look interesting.
Thanks again, me. Much much appreciated :)
31 me
August 7, 2011 at 7:04 PM
totally second @28chembu. in my opinion homosexuality IS a choice. it might be a very hard choice but you can choose to be or not to be gay (at the end it left with one mind set really) i too have nothing against people who choose to be gay, but since i am a believer in God who made human of 2 sex, male and female for a reason I believe it is against, not only my religion but also others. i am not saying you are a bad person for being gay, nor a straight person to be good, because really at the end, we are all only human, who are we to judge, it's between that person and God.
and as for a child of same sex couple MIGHT be better off than a child of an alcoholic straight couple, there's of course a truth in that. but that's work of fate and luck of a person, again that's in GOD's hand.
sexual preference and homosexuality has always been an issue, even in the states. let alone in asian countries where we hold tightly on our culture and religion.
Required fields are marked *
malta
August 7, 2011 at 8:55 PM
/"and as for a child of same sex couple MIGHT be better off than a child of an alcoholic straight couple"/
?...This statement is really offensive and completely the opposite of your earlier statement that -
/"i am not saying you are a bad person for being gay, nor a straight person to be good"/
...so basically you are not a bad person for being gay, but being gay will probably make you a worst parent than an alcoholic....
There are horrible parents all over the place and their sexuality has nothing to do with why they are bad parents.
Required fields are marked *
me
August 7, 2011 at 9:32 PM
I'm really sorry if I have offended anyone. Sincerely. I was trying to point out a comment made by someone much earlier, which i now can't find, stating the issue with gay couple and adoption.
and all I meant was, exactly what you said, being a good parent does not have anything to do with their sexual preference. i don't know where did you get the impression that i was trying to say-/'but being gay will probably make you a worst parent than an alcoholic'/ - because that's certainly not what i meant.
again, if i have offend anyone, i apologize for that.
Required fields are marked *
Rachael
August 8, 2011 at 11:48 AM
I think what caused that deduction (because I read it the same as Malta) is because of your wording.
By saying a child *might* (your emphasis) be better off with someone who is generally considered the worse of the two options (the alcholic) you are saying gay parents are only slightly above the worse option aka the "lesser of two evils" only because of the fact they're homosexual and nothing else. The emphasis reads that you find it the barest of bare differences in how they could be treated.
On a side note of that topic. This has been researched profusely and general science states that there is no harm in a child being raised by homosexual parents any more than being raised by heterosexual parents.
Required fields are marked *
Rachael
August 8, 2011 at 11:41 AM
So, because you are against homosexuality in judgement because the Bible says so, then you are also against women cutting their hair, people getting tattoos, and people eating shellfish right?
Required fields are marked *
32 peony
August 7, 2011 at 7:31 PM
Hope this doesn't sound too whish-washy... but while I agree with the person who said: "Sexuality is definitely not genetic and set in stone." I also think that homosexuality is natural, just as much as heterosexuality.
It's true, sexuality is NOT genetic, but just as you can't blame someone for being in love with someone you don't like, you can't blame a person for loving the same sex.
I actually think that most, if not everyone, is bisexual. I hate when everything is black and white: you are DEFINITELY gay or straight. Most people probably entertain gay/straight thoughts at some point in their life, and it's totally natural -- you're just attracted to someone.
Also -- not to inflame anyone, but if God really doesn't accept gays, why did he make us capable of being atttracted to the same gender?
Required fields are marked *
rainbow
August 7, 2011 at 7:50 PM
there's a lot of things that are not acceptable not only in religion but also in society but still people do it! why does God make them capable of doing those things then. capability to do something in mostly in our hands, it's left in our judgment how do we see it.. either it's right or wrong.
note. i am not saying there's a right or wrong in this case =)
peace.
Required fields are marked *
espresso
August 8, 2011 at 9:38 AM
like i said before to peony, it's something called "FREE WILL."
how can we make our own decisions? cause we have FREE WILL.
Required fields are marked *
Rachael
August 8, 2011 at 11:54 AM
Chicken or the egg question. Did God give us free will or did we choose to have free will, which means God allowed for us to have it? Either way, is it really free?
Required fields are marked *
peony
August 8, 2011 at 5:10 PM
to rachael and expresso:
I think this all circles back to whether you can CHOOSE your lovers or not. When you say free will, that's implying that people can pick who they love.
This is highly debatable, but I think that it's somehow more biological--you just fall for a person (hormones in action? idk, sucked at biology) and maybe not always the person you want.
Zoe
August 7, 2011 at 8:13 PM
You're actually right about most/everyone being bisexual. In fact, there's a scientific scale made to judge how "homosexual" to how "heterosexual" a person is.
It's a set of numbers from 1 to 5 rating them on their homosexuality with 1 (I think) being a super-macho, manly homophobic and 5 (I think) being an effeminate, "oppa~"-drawling flower. As it is, most men and women fall in the 2-4 range.
In regards to the "God doesn't really accept gays" part, I think God truly loves everyone and if he must come up in debates such as these, we should remember that it is not our place to judge others. He knows what He accepts and we are just the silly flesh buckets that inhabit the world He made. Case closed.
Required fields are marked *
Rachael
August 8, 2011 at 11:58 AM
Eh, I'd be wary of stereotyping of the "super-macho" and "effeminate" as that doesn't corrolate with sexuality. Otherwise I adore your phrase of "silly flesh buckets" and must scheme in how I can use this.
Required fields are marked *
Steamy Bun
August 7, 2011 at 8:25 PM
"I actually think that most, if not everyone, is bisexual."
I do too, really. But any time I've said this ppl either get mad, think I'm crazy, or mistake it for the beginning of a "coming out" speech. That's a REALLY hard thing for most ppl to accept.
Required fields are marked *
peony
August 8, 2011 at 6:39 AM
haha thanks.
I feel that if people accept their homosexual (or bisexual?) urges/thoughts, they would discriminate less against people who are mostly gay.
a friend of mine in high school once confessed that sometimes she felt a little gay. she was so embarrassed. I think sexuality as a whole would be so much simpler if people just didn't think about it and make it a big deal.
Required fields are marked *
espresso
August 8, 2011 at 9:37 AM
It's called "free will."
God will not and "can not" force anybody to only be attracted to the same gender. It's against His nature.
He gave us the ability to make our own decisions, whether they be good or bad.
Required fields are marked *
carpetfibers
August 8, 2011 at 8:35 PM
I have to question then, conversely, whether 'God will not and "cannot" force anybody to only be attracted' to the opposite gender.
I mean, if free will guarantees that God's not going to make me only be attracted to other women, then the opposite should be true as well. God's not going to make me only be attracted to men.
Required fields are marked *
33 Yunie
August 7, 2011 at 8:02 PM
OMG HAN GO EUN!!!
I really have to watch this now, I loved her ever since I first saw her in Bodyguard. I used to have such a huge crush on her and to be able to see her playing a lesbian makes the fangirl in me really happy.
It also makes me happy that the trailers don't seem to point towards any extreme events such as the suicide/madness that accompanied previous lesbian relationships in Korean films. *cough*InMyEndIsMyBeginning/MementoMori*cough*
I can't wait to see this episode now >.<''
Required fields are marked *
34 peony
August 7, 2011 at 8:05 PM
Ah... I see your point :)
but I've always believed that attraction--loving someone and wanting to be with them--isn't really a choice.
I wondered if I was out of my league talking religion, since I'm atheist, but there ARE choices you can make, about alcohol, drugs, smoking, etc. These are things you can choose not to do.
Required fields are marked *
35 peony
August 7, 2011 at 8:06 PM
shoot, i meant for my above post to be for rainbow. i shouldve used reply.
Required fields are marked *
rainbow
August 7, 2011 at 8:25 PM
haha. it's okay. still, noted. i see your point too =)
Required fields are marked *
36 malta
August 7, 2011 at 8:16 PM
This seems pretty groundbreaking for popular Korean culture. I wonder what the reaction would have been if all the characters were homosexual men...
One thing I always wonder about is that shows that have mainly gay characters tend to focus on only one gender– so that we rarely see relationships between the genders where there is no element of unrequited love or relationships within genders where there is no element of unrequited love. Most shows I've seen that have homosexual characters, those characters are almost wholly defined by their sexuality, but that's certainly not the case with the gay people I know in real life. They are more than their homosexual relationships/ attractions/ feelings. They're just people.
Required fields are marked *
Kasie J.
August 7, 2011 at 8:23 PM
I've never really understood how the Korean fans go crazy when male pop idols will hug/kiss/touch each other--especially when it's clear they're acting in a homosexual way. Heechul's kissing of his members during concerts. Big Bang's dramas where the members act as couples.
I know it's all fake, acted, and usually just fanservice but it just makes me wonder. . .
Required fields are marked *
malta
August 7, 2011 at 9:30 PM
From the western point of view it's definitely confusing to watch... I mean Siwon's latest promotional poster for Super Junior?!!!...
http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/736/28486822553177415633120.jpg
He looks like he should win best outfit at the NYC Gay Pride Parade. I don't have a problem with this– he looks good, although totally cheesy.
Seriously though there are just as many homosexual people in "conservative" countries as there are in "liberal" ones. (I use quotations because these words can't adequately represent the culture of a country- way too simplistic.) Homosexuals in conservative countries often are repressed, they don't act on their feelings out of fear and shame, they hide their relationships, or they get caught and deal with how society and their family react, but in the end, they are still there.
...So that's my long winded way of saying some of those idols are actually gay whether their fans are willing to believe it or not.
Required fields are marked *
Kasie J.
August 7, 2011 at 9:50 PM
Yes, I've also read that there are actually gay pride parades in Korea--except they are anything but. Because most people are wearing masks and hide their identities due to the discrimination and social stigmas they'd have to face which cancels out the purpose of a pride parade.
I definitely agree with you that there are probably plenty of gay idols who just aren't actually out.
It's so weird. Seeing that picture doesn't really make me think Siwon is gay but if you had switched the star from any Western country, I would have immediately pegged him as gay.
Required fields are marked *
malta
August 7, 2011 at 10:11 PM
Just to be clear, I don't claim to have any idea what Siwon's sexuality is and I don't think it's important to being in Super Junior (being an idol, I'm pretty sure he just wore what they prepared for him), but the image is so evocative of gay culture. I think it's fascinating.
It's like how Lady Gaga dresses and wears make-up like a drag queen half the time and everyone thought she was so "original" (cult of originality/individuality?) when she first came out with her outfits. Its LGBTQ culture manifested in the mainstream....At least it is in the U.S. I can't speak for Korea though.
Asian idols can wear whatever they want and I never really think about whether they are gay or straight in real life because of it. They can pretty much get away with anything. (case and point= G-dragon. So much swagger in just one person! He can make anything look cool. :) ) I think it's because everything idols do is such a performance that you know it's to put on a show as opposed to painfully reveal their true inner-self through art, music or whatever (a very western/American thing IMO).
minhato
August 8, 2011 at 6:20 PM
Totally true, Malta.
I still remember a documentary I saw some years ago about gay culture in TV and they mentioned specifically South Korea, a country which has a lot of musical icons related to the gay culture (whether they are gay or not) but then they are completely alarmed when an innocent drama like this one appears.
I am not going to comment about my idea about gay people and if it's genetic or not and so on, because luckily we are in 2011 so, to discuss that kind of things seems from ancient times.
I hope this drama gets more positive attention. I will try to watch it asap.
Thanks for the info!
Required fields are marked *
conan
August 8, 2011 at 8:56 AM
I know right? I thought it was cute at first but now... it's just weird. I don't know what kind of message they're trying to tell me. It's confusing because apparently the bond between bros in Korea is a little bit closer than bros in the west. Maybe because I'm not Korean, so I don't understand these things.
Makes me wonder, are some of the boys amongst those boy bands gay? Haha *slapsface*
Required fields are marked *
msim
August 8, 2011 at 2:33 PM
"Makes me wonder, are some of the boys amongst those boy bands gay?"
Sure, some are. It's an ideal place to meet other pretty boys ;-)
Same for girl-bands. Gay lovelies are every where, in every field, in every job, in every family.
I can't quite imagine what would happened if a top idol or actor came out in SKorea.
Judging from the Bible-Brigade-comments which come out (pun intended) every time javabeans includes a well-written well-balanced article with a gay content - it won't be pretty.
***off to watch Antique Bakery, a little m/m loveliness always picks me up.
Required fields are marked *
37 Kasie J.
August 7, 2011 at 8:20 PM
Well, I was going to write something else but I decided it's really not worth it. People will think and believe whatever they want to. I just hope people understand love between a man and a man or a woman and a woman isn't anything less than love between a man and a woman.
Props to Korea. I know overall the country is super conservative but it looks like slowly progress is being made.
I kind of want to watch this.
Required fields are marked *
38 사랑해요
August 7, 2011 at 8:21 PM
koreans are not yet comfortable with the world of gays and lesbians. i have korean classmates and they feel irritated seeing those kind of relationships. to be honest, i'm in a country where there are a lot of gays and lesbians, but i still feel uncomfortable with lesbians and more comfortable with gays. :> probably because i already considered gays are girls. hehe. anyways, at the end of the day.. I STILL LOVE BOYS. 남자 좌해!!"!!
Required fields are marked *
39 Steamy Bun
August 7, 2011 at 8:41 PM
I honestly respect conservative cultures like that of Asia. Having values and rules is so important for keeping us in line and on the right path. I wish American culture were more conservative, in terms of dressing sense, sex, what's portrayed in the media, etc. There's this Indian movie where this guy wants to change the way women are treated, and he says "the old traditions are dying out" and this girl replies "but who's going to decide which traditions are good and which are bad?". I hope we can make the right choices about what's right and what's wrong, and eventually the conservative countries can practice a greater tolerance for homosexuality while still maintaining their values.
It's great to see Korean TV slowly starting to depict gay couples as normal people. I think people will come around eventually!
Required fields are marked *
40 Noelle
August 7, 2011 at 8:49 PM
I would love to watch this. I find it sad that so many people wanted it pulled from the air. All I can hope for is that those who watched this will gain understanding that people are people no matter sexual orientation or interests.
Required fields are marked *
41 Ashley
August 7, 2011 at 10:10 PM
Sounds like an interesting storyline... And before we jump down each other's throats let us remember that even if homosexuality is a sin, we are all sinners and human beings and we must love and be kind to one another, even if we choose not to accept certain actions as right/wrong. Let he without sin cast the first stone.
Required fields are marked *
42 amg01
August 7, 2011 at 10:25 PM
*Homosexuality E La Natura*
As far as I can see, judging from nature all species have a very simple life cycle, they are born, grow and mature, reproduce and than die, and the cycle has been repeating time and time again, since the beginning of all living creatures, from a one cell organism, to a multicellular organisms such as humans.
There are true “Inter-sexual” species in nature even among humans, but I do believe that the modern concept of homosexuality as we know it is, something completely different than a true inter-sexual (genetically) speaking person or any other living thing.
I do believe that when we as humans so casually exchange the word “Love for Sex,” it creates a lot of problems. There seems to be a valid reason why “nature” by enlarge does not allowed or imprint in the gene code a “Gay Gene,” when it comes to the general population of any species.
What would happen to a species in which a gay gene was trigger in their DNA, it is quite simple in a few short generations, that species will die out, since the primary function of sexual intercourse among all species is for the sole purpose of procreation.
I personally think that the reason why nature as a general rule, gives the general population and aversion for accepting same sex sexual inter-reaction, is to prevent any species from self extinction.
I know that a lot of people will say hey we can adopt, or use artificial insemination, but I as far as I can remember artificial insemination, has been around for a short period of time, as opposed to the century's that living things have been around, and even without a gay gene, many species have gone extinct, remember the Dinosaurs?
I do believe that sexuality is a very fluid aspect, specially in humans, modern researches have even found out that woman’s sexuality is even more fluid than man's, but that's another topic all by itself.
So what about religion does God really hate homosexuals? Lets take this argument even further does God hate inter-sexual humans, that by no fault of their own are born with the genetic male makeup with the exterior of a female or vice versa?
I live it up to you to answer all this questions, but in closing; I feel that most times God gets blame for peoples homophobia, and the lack of love for others, I am not suggesting that we must used “Love,” in order to justified all human vices, or behaviors, when people used the argument, that all sexual behavior, however mild or extreme maybe, and try to equate that with love, they are “honestly mistaken,” since I love pizza, but that does not mean I want to have sex with a slice of it.
I hope that I did not offend any one, and if you guy's have read my prior posts, you will know that I am a heterosexual “Guy” that has always defended gays and lesbians in this blog, last but not least; I believe that the greatest tragedy that I have found is people in both camps that behave in a prejudicial and hateful meaner, if you are a religious person and hates gays, and if you are a gay person that hates religious people, at the end of the day both still hateful people. And like my Mom used to say; 'Son two wrongs do not make right.”
Required fields are marked *
43 Memlu
August 7, 2011 at 10:45 PM
Hahaha, okay, well, after leaving five zillion cranky queer lady comments everywhere: I just really want to say that I am super excited to find out this special exists! And I'm even more excited to find out it isn't--you know, it isn't salacious sensationalizing, like, ooooooh, ~sexy lesbians,~ or some tragic thing, but about these ladies and their lives and struggles and they just happen to love each other. Yay! Now I just have to hope someone will subtitle it, haha.
Required fields are marked *
Diane
August 7, 2011 at 11:27 PM
Same! I really want it to be subbed now. I really enjoyed the gay couple in Life is Beautiful and the younger guy's relationship with his family and I wonder how much better it would have been had the writer not had her hands tied by viewers/the network.
It makes me wonder what these netizens would think of a drama like Lip Service!
Required fields are marked *
anotheraddict
August 7, 2011 at 11:30 PM
Cute! I, too, hope this gets subbed.
I'm just curious~ do the netizens who are protesting this also get equally up in arms about the (many) dramas that romanticize incest (or so-called "faux-incest")?
Required fields are marked *
44 Carinne
August 7, 2011 at 11:29 PM
I will applaud any Asian country going forward as like The L Word. Katherine Moennig makes me hot and steams me up.
Required fields are marked *
45 Ciara
August 8, 2011 at 12:16 AM
I would be really interested in seeing this Drama. I hope Dramafever will be able to feature it on their site. That being said, I find it sad that people aren't open to learning more about different cultures / ways of life, ect. It doesn't mean that you have to accept it, but it doesn't mean that you should write it off either!
Required fields are marked *
46 red
August 8, 2011 at 2:40 AM
Kudos to korea in producing a show like this. To discriminate based on someones sexual orientation seems baseless, its not something done out of malice nor does it hurt anyone else so why do we need to criticize and hate on it?
Required fields are marked *
47 Ar-Feiniel
August 8, 2011 at 5:59 AM
I'd really love to see it, although I prefere gay themed tv/movies (hello, eye candy!). I've seen most of the available on the internet Korean and Japanese queer movies, and the only reason I decided to watch "Life is Beautiful" (63 feaking episodes!) was for Tae Sub/Kyung Soo pairing.
For the record - I'm straight-ish (cos making out with girls is fun), I love me some crossdressing dramas, and I don't think that boys in them were gay at all, cos they never had romantic feelings for other guys, except for those who turned out to be women. *g* I think it's safe to say, that if Kim Yoon Hee or Go Mi Nyu weren't girls, they woudn't have inspired these kinds of feelings. Go Mi Nam was even an identical twin and yet bandmates haven't fallen in love with him. lol
Here's my take on being gay/lesbian and God, explained so eloquently by one of my favourite tv shows - "Queer as Folk":
(conversation between two gays)
"Emmett: I don't think God appreciates it as much as you do.
Ted: I think God appreciates it even more. Because he created you in his image. At least that's what I was always taught. And since God is love and God doesn't make mistakes, then you must be exactly the way he wants you to be, the way he intended you to be. And that goes for every person, every planet, every mountain, every grain of sand, every song, every tear... and every faggot. We're all his, Emmett. He loves us all."
Required fields are marked *
L
August 8, 2011 at 10:37 AM
Ehr, if God made everyone exactly the way He wanted you to be...does that apply to Hitler as well?
I'd like to clarify that yes, God did make us but our flaws do not come from Him. Our flaws come from the Fall, the moment Eve took a bite of that fruit and gave it to Adam.
Required fields are marked *
Ar-Feiniel
August 8, 2011 at 2:22 PM
God didn't make Hitler the way he become. Humans change. It's a thing we do.
But hey, at least he made him white, hetero male; cos if in addition to being a mass murderer he was born queer, that would really made him a monster, right?
Frankly, my dear, I hate this kind of comparisons, cos
a) Hitler made a hell on earth, and I should know, since my country was one of those affected the most by his evil actions;
b) it implies that being gay is as bad (or worse) than being a killer;
c) every time I hear such an argument I know that it's pointless to discuss things further cos I know that God hasn't yet made a man who was able to change a mind of a "Good Christian".
I can only hope that you'll learn to be more tolerant in case your kids are born gay. Believe me, they'll be fully humans as well.
Required fields are marked *
L
August 10, 2011 at 9:39 PM
If it's possible to be born gay...I suppose it's possible to be born a pedophile as well? How about incest between two adults?
A) Well...who doesn't know? =__=;
B) In biblical terms, being gay is just as bad as being a killer. Likewise, lying is the same as killing. Masturbation is the same as cussing. Stealing is the same as being gay. God sees all of those as sin. Sin is just SIN in His terms. One is not greater than the other. Humans are the one that make one greater than the other.
C) I don't get what you just said. D:
And your last comment, you can just take it back. That was really rude. =( I was only clarifying things but you made it seem as if I could barely tolerate gays. Just because I believe in God doesn't mean I hate them or can't stand the sight of them or can't love them. It's like saying I'd push my child away if he stole a candybar at the shop (read point B) or completely disown him if he had pre-marital sex with his GF. Assuming that I'm a homophobe because I'm Christian is like me assuming that all gays are sexually active and will get an infection because of it. =/
Last time I checked, Christianity wasn't about leaving a citizen on the side of the road. It was about picking him up and helping him along the way. Not everyone's going to be perfect. I realize that. I'm not perfect either (as you can read already). Just....asdk;aghl IDK what to say anymore. :(
Required fields are marked *
Ar-Feiniel
August 11, 2011 at 11:26 AM
I meant that if you go for such an extreme example from the get go, is there any room for discussion?
And yeah, everybody knows about Hitler, but there are different kinds of knowing. I know about Korean War and atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki too, but I don't have an emotional connection to these events.
Consensual incest between two adults nowadays (keywords: "consensual" and "adults") is ok in some cultures and isn't in others. But if I remember correctly there was a lot of incest going on in the Bible and it wasn't out of the norm.
If I offended you, I'm sorry, but as I was born and raised Catholic I've met enough hypocritical, judgemental and self righteous people that made me wonder if this is religion of love or hate. And if your first thought was to compare being gay to being Hitler (or someone like him), than how could it not be my first conclusion that you wouldn't want one as your kid? But if you say that you would - in your heart - really accept who he (or she) is, and not make him deny himself for your beliefs (and as you've said - you're only human with flaws), then yeah, I can take it back.
As a rule I don't trust people who say and do things in the name of God, cos does anyone of us have a right to do so? And don't tell me that priests do, cos they're also only human (and some of them happen to be gay as well - so, are they condemned or not?).
So you believe what you believe, and I'll remain theological Switzerland, but don't tell people how they should live, what they should feel and who they should love, unless they ask you.
I don't complain about religious/Christian programming which goes on for hours or even 24/7 on some channels (not some measly one hour drama) although it offends my sensibilities (and if they mix it with politics - me personally - as a citizen) so my advice is - if you don't want to watch lesbians on tv, skip the channel.
L
August 11, 2011 at 12:25 PM
Ehr, I didn't say anything about having the show banned or restricted or whatever. =/
48 rita
August 8, 2011 at 7:38 AM
i just want to know if this show is going to be subbed and where can i watch it?? it sounds like it would be great...i'm hetero but have friends that i've known for over 40 years that are both gay and lesbian and even before it was okay to tell anyone about their preferences we had a tight network of friends that became their "family"....people who would accept them unconditionally for who they were not matter what....in the old days we were known as "fag hags" ....but our "Families" are still together...those of use who have survived...the late 80's and early 90's is when we lost most of our loved ones...but there are still a few of us oldies around ..why can't we just all love and let live????!!!!life is too short to make this life so miserable......just a thought
Required fields are marked *
49 Misheru
August 8, 2011 at 7:40 AM
People need to stop feeling offended by the whole thing. I don't get it why people take it so personal.
Some people are gay... so what.
I wanna see this drama!
Required fields are marked *
50 qwerty8
August 8, 2011 at 10:16 AM
Interesting! I want to watch this drama.
Required fields are marked *