Frings

Here for Yeongseo/Juran all of a sudden, hellooooo

Ngl, I wish they'd managed to get 16 episodes length greenlit so that the pacing could feel more appropriate. I wonder how much they're really going to try to cram into 12 ep runtime.

If you don't have the reading comprehension to understand my first paragraph to such a level, this conversation won't go anywhere. Cheers, enjoy the show. Or don't, and good luck on your almighty mission.

"Opinions can't be wrong or incorrect", in my opinion the sky is black. In my opinion, different human races can be superior or inferior to each other. In my opinion, queer people don't deserve to exist. What? It's my opinion. It's correct to me, so how can you say they're wrong and why argue against it at all? (Yes, obviously I'm being hyperbolic - that you can't seem to see how these supposedly measured and/or revolutionary things you're calling for just further validate those you're supposedly fighting against is kinda concerning, nvm exasperating.)

A queer character who appears for 5 seconds and is never mentioned again is wrong? Why? Why did they appear at all in the first place, why was it only for 5 seconds? How long is the total thing? How much did it cost for them to be there? There are so many ways that could have happened. It could be the very first character to ever appear in that landscape. It could be a character someone had to fight for 10 years to be able to put there at all. It could be a character someone had to put their entire livelihood at stake to be able to put there. It could be a character someone put there to see if there is interest, if there's positive response, because if there is - they can try for 10, 15, 60 seconds next time. It could be a character an artist who isn't sure of themselves yet felt something in their soul to dare to try to put out there to see how it felt to themselves. But no, sure... it's automatically wrong, and the alternative of having, say, e.g. 0 characters for 64800 seconds is the choice to pick unless 32400 seconds full of your desired queer is done instead.

You *keep* repeating this notion that 'if it's imperfect, then it's 'wrong', and it's best not to have it at all' which is exactly what keeps progress from happening out here in the real world. Real life doesn't work like that - every single conquest ever made was never made at once, was never perfect at first, was never 'good enough' the hundredth time, nvm the first. This idea is how one comes to buy into the notion that there's ever an end point, a good enough. For someone who's called this being thrown a bone, that's... quite the thing. Will you ever define what is this mythical "good enough" queer yet, or just give more examples of what's not it for you personally?

I'll give you a tip on where the understanding of 'queer representation' that is being presented here in these impassioned criticisms fails: the point of pushes for queer representation was never to have "good" queer representation as it eventually came to be understood. The point isn't "positive" rep, it's not "good" rep. It's *diverse*. The point isn't that a queer character for 5 seconds is wrong; it's that if that's the *only* queer character, we have problems. And that's a problem that isn't solved by removing the 5-seconds-queer: it's by adding more - something you are making harder to happen by rioting against the 5-seconds-queer and calling it 'wrong'. It perfectly serves the interests of those who want none, and it's what broadcasters are most fine-tuned to listen to.

And look, your impassionate revolutionary speeches are all well and good, but if you're so against "giving into demands of the system" at all, then why are you so intent on seeing things exist within it? Go find the actually revolutionary queer art you seem to desire where it does exist - outside this system you despise. There's plenty of Korean and other artists doing exactly what you want, they're just not doing it on commercial mainstream. Why not go there and prop those artists up and further their mission that supposedly aligns with your own? You *don't* think it's wrong to give into the system at all, otherwise you wouldn't be here repeatedly calling for what you want inside it.

This conversation seems to be lacking actual depth in the understanding of what a 'system' is, how it functions, how it exists, how people exist within it, and the variety of ways in which it's possible to 'fight' it, 'change', 'revolutionize', etc. Either that, or you truly believe utopian anarcho 101, and we're definitely not getting anywhere then regardless.

Lastly, subtext isn't the same as 'different interpretations'. Yes, the moment art is made, it's subject to interpretations completely outside an author's stated intent - that doesn't eliminate authorial intent nor craft. *Subtext is text*, and I encourage you to learn more about the process of writing if you're curious why; we're always in need of artists with your desire for change and rep. Regardless, 'might' =/= 'is', which is where you're confounding yet another argument - there's a difference between subtext that has been placed intentionally by an artist (the thing you are currently saying is not good enough and is a cowardly thing to lower yourself enough to do), and the process of art 'consumption' (or experiencing a story) putting into existence different 'versions' of a story. If you're unable to prop up people pushing for the bare minimum, you're unable to create the environment for the "good enough" you so desire.

Absolutely. And you rightly bring up how queerness is not (just) about cis lesbian romance. One of my fav things about this story is the different types of women and queerness presented - the gender dynamics and exploration really is/has always been the main part of Jeongnyeon IMHO, certainly at least for the first half of the comic, and that people are not just ignoring those but outright burying them in these 'discussions' is.... sigh.

Ngl - I personally never expected this comic to actually be adapted (at least not within like 10 years of Handmaiden, certainly not a high budget weekend show on a major network, certainly not considering the developing sociopolitical scenario in SK...). I really have to give it to KTR for evidently essentially using her garnered power to make this happen - it's a bit confusing to me to see folks plainly ignoring this incredibly key part of this project. To call this cowardly... phew.

You know - your mention of Dawson's Creek reminded me of something: letter campaigns. And remembering the essence of what we used to physically mail to TV stations when pushing for better really crystalized what bothers me so much about the way some (not all) in the purported target audience are reacting to this: the difference between "we want more" and "we don't want this".

Do you know what queer artists are fighting tooth and nail to get representation on screen? THE ONES MAKING JEONGNYEON. omg. omgffggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg

Yep, fully agree. Your mention of Xena is perfect because that's exactly what I was thinking of before - having not just studied it but lived through it and knowing from experience how in the (anglo)western world, without Xena we wouldn't have had Buffy then we wouldn't have had Once and Again then we wouldn't have had The L Word then we wouldn't have had The OC then we wouldn't have had Glee then Euphoria, etc. As well as so, so many more flawed works that helped change *everything* despite not doing "enough".

I was thinking these people would trash Xena if it came out nowadays in a market where it would be absolutely groundbreaking (like the South Korean one). Then again, that's kind of what's happening right now, I guess. lol

I'm not against critiquing. That's not really what's happening to the comments we're disagreeing with. One's feelings may be valid, that doesn't make their opinion correct, and there's a whole lot of incorrectness going on here.

What exactly is "enough"? How do you define "enough"? Let me help: there IS no 'enough' - there is no 'right' way to tell a queer story. There are *various* ones, some of which are able to exist on the mainstream in some places, some of which are not. And those that don't exist on the mainstream media market for consumption aren't missing simply because writers are too 'chicken' to tell their stories. You claim to be critiquing a system while ignoring everything that that very system imposes onto the people and stories it's trying to suppress - how exactly do you think a TV show ever gets made? How many people do you think is involved? How much money? Who exactly are you pinning the blame of being too cowardly onto here? Do you know the reason why what they cut was cut? Were you a fly in the wall in the countless negotiation rooms that were had in order to come here and say this is equivalent to throwing the audience a damn bone?

Your definition of subtext is absurd. Subtext IS TEXT. It would not exist if the writer did not want it to exist. Are you truly trying to say Jeongnyeon is too chicken of a work? JEONGNYEON?? That is absolutely ABSURD. They've been trying to make this show for over three years. There is a lot of passion and love that goes behind trying to get this out into the world on the mainstream. They ARE pushing the comfort zone - just, again, not to the level you personally want, because it's easy to ignore the complications that come with existing in the real world. You don't even know what's going to happen or not in the show, yet you're here being derisive of a work that is doing more than any other you could point at to such a platform on Korean TV, particularly in the current sociopolitical scenario of SK.

I unfortunately lost my temper yesterday when trying to engage with the absurdity of the notion that essentially queer voices should either be perfect or shut up (plus the amalgamation of nearly every ill-conceived faux progressive online 'discourse' possible, like an Exodia of social media 'activism' notes merging into one right before one's eyes on the MDL comment section LOL).

Thanks for more reasonably wording some sense, appreciate seeing it and I truly believe it's important for the silent majority that may read these.

Unfortunately some folks don't understand that giving backslash to queer works that are moving the needle for not moving it "enough" is counter-productive and only aids those who wish to silence queer voices completely... Maybe with time they'll come to understand that having utopian desires is all well and good, but in the meantime we need to exist in the real world under the existing system.

(And lord, we're not even on the 4th episode yet, lol. We don't even *know* what the show will do... and regardless, it's raising the original material into the mainstream and the limelight even if it itself is different or imperfect; it's chock full of queerness already; and rather than giving it a chance and showing advertisers and producers that if they make it, people will hype it enough to make commercial sense, that next time a GL pitch is made they might actually not throw it out the window because of prior iterative successes... we're out here trying to prove that it's an even bigger headache than expected versus just putting out another cishet romcom, because not only do they have to risk it against conservatives, they have its purported target audience trashing it and trying to turn the average spectator *off* it. Things like this make me think of Isabel Fall and other such cases. How much harsher we are against our own than the system we are supposed to be radically changing.)

Zzzz exit my replies then already, thanks

I’m happy to disrupt the exchange of dumb ideas by pointing out they’re dumb, that is indeed my purpose. Stupidity thrives in a vacuum. But I’m also not a fan of being annoyed and annoying in turn so hopefully the weekend is overy soon.

You have no nuance in your comments, and barely any context. Feel free to provide them at any time though, or keep doing the wonderful job you’re doing of driving people away from this drama who might’ve otherwise been interested and who could benefit from it by levelling your insane “arguments” towards its creators and producers. I have not lied at any point that I engaged you in good faith - and if you are being immature, then I’ll call you immature. If what you say is dumb, I’ll say it’s dumb; I’m not interested in nor obliged to mince words, and you can choose to take it or leave it. If you have interest in and I have time to break down a variety of your superficial “critiques” towards the show including criticizng the creator for “self censoring” and saying it’s MORALLY WRONG to, then maybe I will later. Doesn’t escape notice how you’ve yet to say I’m wrong about you being a teenager - which is fine and not inherently an issue or an issue at all, but I’ve also likely been in fandom longer than you’ve been alive and is why it’s obvious you’re coming from a good place despite how wildly off-base you are - which doesn’t negate the fact that you can (and are) be more harmful than not regardless of intent.

If someone is being annoying, people will be annoyed. Shocker. I previously engaged with this person who is inundating this comment section with their dumb as rocks takes in perfectly good faith, only to hear the most asinine “arguments” possible back - so yeah nah, I’m good, but thanks for the advice.

Dunno who “you guys” is but I type at 100wpm 🤷

👍

There's that veneer again, lol. You think it's malicious mockery to disagree with you and point out all the ways in which you're wrong, and I've better things to do with my time than "argue" with teens online who seem to know no other way to engage with topics than with faux intellectual moralizing language. ¯\_ (ツ)_/¯ Such as actually watching the show and seeing what it does or does not do! So I'mma do that, good luck on your little crusade, have fun serving no one but the detractors of queer works.

Asked

Translation: "Doing something isn't the right thing to do if the something isn't perfect; the way to break a culture of intolerance and discrimination is to not do anything unless it can be done perfectly and in a way that pushes the envelope to the exact degree that I personally find desirable and morally upstanding from my position of having nothing at stake in making it happen. Otherwise, it is improper and worthy of shaming, especially from the community the creators belong to and are trying to tell stories about. A queer story that dares not meet my standards is more worthy of my active criticism than the ocean of stories that actively uphold the structure I pretend to be clamoring against. I have no idea how creation and production works, nevermind activism. I am used to a modern westernized reality where queer media is possible and accessible elsewhere and have no idea of the context and history of how that even came to be; relatedly, I am comfortable using words I've read without ever studying or absorbing the sociopolitical theses they come from and refer to, in order to make convoluted non-points online about how capitalism and conservatism bad and 'representation' good. Since those things are evident truths, I can capably perform upstanding morality online that will yield me short-term positive social points because that is, after all, how a conservative culture will be defeated: by me serving the conservatives' mission perfectly when joining their side to argue against queer works without even realizing that's what I'm doing and defending myself with a veneer of intellectualism I cannot actually uphold when disagreed with."

Sure kiddo, the SIN OF CENSORSHIP is on THIS WORK'S HANDS and MUST BE SHAMED or whatever

Kim Tae Ri ate pussy off the bone licked the gravy clean right up there on Korean screen, inspired the very creation of the original work, prepped the production and creation for years until it could even be picked up and made for the screen, and you're here saying this project that she's producing is doing nothing but disrespectfully cowering before the homophobic masses or whatever lmfao.