ariel alba

His time in the BL series Kiss x Kiss x Kiss must serve as an experience for Hideyoshi Kan in the genre. With him as the protagonist, the manga could very well be adapted to television successfully.

Social networks and Japanese media are echoing and, since its premiere, they have selected the five best charms of this drama. Although there may be several while the series is broadcast, these are:
1. The look of popular actor Kan Hideyoshi, who showed great acting skills in his role as Sakae.
2. Nishiyama Jun's believable portrayal of office worker Soga.
3. The construction of Soga's sexuality from heterosexuality to homosexuality, giving complexity to the story.
4. The music used that reflects the mood of the protagonists.
5. The detailed account of Sakae's feelings for Soga.

Hello. I visit this platform a lot. He speaks Spanish, my native language. This is a good place to watch series, especially because it has BL as its theme.

The opening theme is "I'll Be There" by GENIC, with lyrics written by its members Joe Nishizawa and Atsuki Mashiko. JBL lovers will be pleased: Acchan, the actor who plays Yoh in the 2023 series 'My Personal Weatherman', is co-author of the song that rolls the opening credits of 'Sukiyanen Kedo Do Yaro ka'. Precisely, the piece talks, as in the drama, about a boy who falls in love with a boy who speaks the Kansai dialect.
Many of the scenes take place in an office or office workers spend time inside a restaurant, with a young chef preparing food, while his customers eat and drink sake. And to top it all off, the poster announcing the series features a plate of TAKOYAKI! Well, I have no doubts: we are in the presence of one of those hybrids between office BL and food BL.
This series has another original point in its favor: the tendency of Japanese BLs is to pair an experienced actor with a less experienced one. Well, this time, the main couple is represented by a very talented and experienced actor, such as Nishiyama Jun, with one of the most popular, charismatic and talented actors in Japan, Hideyoshi Kan.
While Nishiyama began his artistic career in 2006 with the film 'Forbidden Siren', which was followed by the drama 'Sushi Oji!', on TV Asahi, and from there he has developed a dizzying and ascending career until today, Hideyoshi Kan is the current master and lord of the Kamen Rider universe, with titles such as 'Kamen Rider Geats', 'Kamen Rider Geats: The Movie', 'Kamen Rider the Winter Movie: Gotchard & Geats', and many more. He also acted in 'Ashita no Watashi e' and Dekiai Cinderella'.

Hello. If I may resume the debate. In Thailand there is a conservative social atmosphere. Discrimination still persists towards the Thai LGBT+ community. There is no legal framework that truly protects them. There has only been some progress. This is not just a problem for that society. It is strange that the problems and conflicts and fights for their rights are not made visible in the series. These are not even addressed in BL, even though the characters in these are members of that human collective.
What they "sell" us, what they tell us in Thai BL dramas, where we see homosexual, lesbian, etc. relationships as natural or normalized, is unreal, illusory. I only remember two series in which this problem is displayed: Not Me and Be My Favorite, although I consider that in the latter the way in which it was approached was much colder and discreet. Call It What You Want I and II tell us about another problem, such as sexual harassment and sexual violations by series directors of actors, the pressure and blackmail to which they are subjected for a role in a series, a phenomenon that is also real and not not only in Thailand, but in Hollywood and other film and television production companies.
If in the United States, which prides itself on being the cradle of freedom and human rights, there are laws such as Florida's Don't Say Gay Bill, Kentucky Senate Bill 150, Michigan House Bill 4257; Arkansas Senate Bill 270, Tennessee Senate Bill 3, West Virginia House Bill 2919 and many more already in force or awaiting approval by state congresses, which attack freedom of expression and prohibit the registration and opening of premises with LGTBI themes; the reading or exhibition in primary and secondary schools of books and audiovisual content that show gay relationships, and even allowing the removal of books with this theme from university libraries; laws that also deny the right of homosexuals to access any service, including medical and educational, or their right to conscientious objection, what could we expect from a country governed by successive military junta that emerged in turn from successive coups d'état?
If the Public Television of Alabama, United States, censored the episode "Mr. Ratburn and the Special Someone" of the legendary children's series “Arthur” because it shows a gay wedding between two teachers, or scenes from the latest version of 'The Beauty and the Beast', considered the first "exclusively gay moment" in Disney history, showing the intimacy between the servant Le Fou (played by Josh Gad) and Gaston (Luke Evans), the knight he serves and desires, Why would Thai television normalize and expose homosexual relationships as natural? Doesn't this have to do with the fact that a very significant sector of the LGBTI+ community resides or is passing through in that nation? Isn't it to attract Western tourists? Isn't their purpose to promote sales of company items, such as those dedicated to the cosmetics and beverage business? Aren't these companies in charge of providing money for serial productions, so they impose their interests and points of view? Isn't it to promote the country as a paradisiacal tourist destination?
Isn't there a certain homophobia in your plots when one of the protagonists believes he is heterosexual until he meets the other and realizes that only with that male character does he feel happy and fulfilled? Isn't there misogyny when it is very common to find characters who justify their sexual orientation based on their dislike of women, feeling deceived by them? In short, this is an issue that cannot be resolved on a social network by shouting: “There is no problem with Thai homosexuals.”

Regarding the demonstration of affection in public in Japan, Korea and Thailand, we cannot ignore that homosexuality, although it is decriminalized, is not legal as marriages between people of the same sex are not recognized, or the ability to adopt children, etc. . Homosexuals in these countries are discriminated against and their rights are not recognized. For example, a couple of members of the LGBT community can only, at this time, join in an illicit relationship in the eyes of the law and society, including religion that also rejects homosexuality.
So, in the event of the death of one of the members of a couple, the survivor does not even have the power to decide what mortuary rites would be offered to them, where they would be buried, what to do with their ashes, etc. This decision would be in the hands of his relatives, since he is not considered a family member.
Nor would they have the power to inherit, keep the home in which they have lived for years, or the properties of the house no matter how much they are theirs when they were purchased, related issues such as life insurance, common bank accounts, etc.
In short, it is unreal, it is illusory, what they “sell” us in the BL series. What they tell us in Thai BL dramas is not real, where we see homosexual, lesbian, etc. relationships as natural or normalized. The struggles for the rights of the LGBT+ community are not even addressed in BL, despite the fact that their characters are members of that human collective. I only remember two series in which this problem is displayed: No Me, precisely a drama starring the same actors from Cooking Crush, and Be My Favorite, although I consider that in the latter the way in which it was approached was much colder and discreet.
I invite you to watch the Japanese drama Dear Tenant, in which a young homosexual is only recognized as “the tenant” of the apartment where he lived with his partner for years. His partner died and he can only be considered as someone who is renting a room in the house that is his, either because he bought it or because he cohabited with his partner. If they were a heterosexual couple they wouldn't have this problem, even if they weren't legally married. This is discrimination. Despite having been taking care of his ex's son and mother for 5 years, he has no right to property, in addition to being involved in another conflict that I won't tell you about in case you are interested in seeing the film. I only add that the Police and Justice intervene and his position is revealed, which is why he will be stigmatized and viewed with contempt by these institutions. The laws of these countries only recognize marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

All of us who watch BL (and NON BL series from this region of the world in general) know that in Asian countries, especially Japan and its neighbors China and Korea, in husband-wife, mother-son, boyfriend-girlfriend relationships , etc., are NOT open to kissing and having physical contact, neither in public nor in private. Mothers and their little babies can be seen kissing. The Philippines, for example, is different in this sense. Perhaps due to the influence of Spanish, that is, Latin, culture.
It is quite uncommon to see two Japanese people, even a couple, kissing or loving each other on the street or in the privacy of their home. The usual greeting between friends is a slight bow of the head. The father-son greeting after not seeing each other for years is to bow on the ground (the son) to greet his parents.
If the couple of Ten and Prem is the one you are referring to in the Thai drama Cooking Crush, this couple from the very first episode, when they met at the same university while bumping into each other in the hallway, the classic trope, and then Ten ate the food prepared by Prem that he was going to throw away, a very quick connection was established between the two. Let's assume that they knew each other since they were children, when Ten's family took him to eat at Prem's grandmother's restaurant. Despite knowing each other recently (I mean as adults), this relationship deepened very quickly. Everything has been flirtation between the two while they went to buy the ingredients for the dish to cook in each lesson, eye contact, long silences after smiling, phone calls, text messages (none of this we have in Sukiyanen...).
The connection between the two is such that Prem's sister and grandmother, on the one hand, and Ten's stepmother and his friends Fire and Metha (already in episode 3 they made fun of Prem, took tennis rackets as guitars and they sang to him that he liked Prem), on the other hand, they realized perhaps even before the two boys could recognize their respective feelings. I would end by saying with respect that as early as in episode 5 (just days after meeting each other, with only a few cooking classes taught, still studying the same year of the degree with which the two began the series and without the culinary contest having yet been held at the same time) who aspires to win Prem with his friends (which gives us the idea of ​​how little time has passed) they were already having perhaps the longest kiss in the history of the BL.
The comparison between the Japanese series and the Thai series does not seem relevant to me. This comparison of yours has the serious problem that while in Japan they do not kiss, in Thailand they do kiss, touch and there is a profusion of hugs and outpouring of feelings among its citizens. They are two different characters in this aspect (and in many others as well). The kiss moment in JBL and Japanese drama in general tends to be quite uncomfortable, especially if we compare them with those in Western series, which are practically a gastronomic demonstration in which one human being eats another.
The connection between the protagonists of the Japanese series is evident. Sakae is more open to establishing romance, but Soga is still heartbroken over the divorce. Plus, he's heterosexual. He is not used to life in Osaka. This relationship is simmering, but I have no doubt that a delicious TAKOYAKI will emerge! .
The actors were chosen very intelligently. Japanese BLs have a tendency to pair an experienced actor with a less experienced one. Well, this time, the main couple is represented by a very talented and experienced actor, such as Nishiyama Jun, with one of the most popular, charismatic and talented actors in Japan, Hideyoshi Kan. Look at the filmography and artistic career of the two and you will know what I mean.

About power relations:
Since I know that BL lovers pursue these dramas regardless of nationality, actors, etc., I will refer to two Thai series that are airing right now. The first is Pit Babe. In this drama we see Alan (Hemmawich Khwanamphaiphan Sailub) as a businessman, owner of a racing car team called X-Hunter, with a garage for repairs, etc., with a private race track. He is the one who pays his workers, that is, the pilots, mechanics, office workers, custodians, floor cleaners, maintenance and anyone necessary in his business. He is the one in charge of making decisions. Jeff is a young mechanic who recently joined the team. I will not refer to the age difference, since both are of legal age, but rather to the power relationship between these two characters. I DO NOT see anyone shocked by this.
In Cooking Crush, Changma (Chatchawit Techarukpong - Victor), a chef recognized both in Thailand and internationally, is in love with Prem (Atthaphan Poonsawas (Gun). As a guest professor, he participates in Gun's theoretical lectures and practical classes. He privileges him over the others, pays more attention to him, smiles at him in class in front of the others. In fact, he is one of the chefs invited to decide the winner of a national cooking competition in which Prem plans to participate as a contestant. I don't see Nobody shocked by this. Like these, there are many more cases in the BL series. And I don't see anyone shocked by this.
It only remains to say that in every relationship there is a distribution of power, even in those couples that are constantly happy. Decisions have to be made and in many cases the preferences, desires or needs are not the same for both members of the couple.
The woman has to take care of the house and the children while the husband provides, etc., etc. Not only is this power manifested or exercised in the teacher-student relationship, but also in, for example, that of bosses and subordinates, doctor-patient, lawyer-client, jailer-inmate, flight captain-stewardess or Flight Controller. . I remembered another JBL, Ossan's Love - In The Sky, and the Great Captain Kurosawa chasing his subordinate Haruta, the new employee acquired by the airline who has just started working there and suffers from harassment by his boss, in full air terminal... in short, even with crimes included, characters like these populate the BL... If they were going to punish him criminally and administratively, it would be for harassment and not for violating the exercise of power. And I don't see anyone shocked by this. Power is a relationship between the person who exercises it and other people.
Foucault already warned us: “Human relations are based on power, which, not being an object, is not acquired, conserved or shared, but is exercised.”

In several comments, several users have expressed our opinions about the dynamic teacher-student relationship and the exercise of power and the series. We cannot separate a critical exercise in this regard from the reason why it is done. You could consult them if you are interested. In fact, in my review of the series I address this and other topics, without thinking whether this is the absolute truth or objective reality, things that do not exist. Thank you.

Luckily, you're not the only one.

In hours we will have the conclusion of this series that has caused so much discomfort in some. I will continue defending the freedom of the creator. The creator also defends this freedom by showing, “visualizing” in his works the question of the limits of this human right, as well as its foundation.
Cinema and television are undoubtedly artistic works and media at the same time, so the creator must consider that his creation is not subject to more limits than those that he, sovereignly, establishes.
On the other hand, I will continue to defend my right, as a public, to consume artistic creations that fit my interests and are within my reach, as well as to disseminate them, as well as express my opinion, as well as to respect that same right in others.
Nothing is more true than we all build characters of ourselves. When we tell someone an anecdote that has happened to us, we are playing a character and we tell it according to how we see it ourselves, but it is not objective reality, that does not exist and therein lies the game when it comes to bringing stories to the cinema and to television.
What a good topic for a debate!

In the 2022 British TV series Big Boys, created by comedian Jack Rooke and directed by Jim Archer (the second season came out in 2023), Jack (Dylan Llewellyn) has been in love with his teacher since he met him on the first day of school. . Jack studies journalism. Already in the second season he is in his second year and is afraid of sex. She is a virgin. Imagine the teacher in all the unimaginable poses. He does not pay attention to classes, following the teacher's movements and dreaming about him. By the way, he doesn't know if Tim is homosexual and tries to find out by inventing a thousand excuses and comical situations such as, for example, entering an auction to buy a table to play table tennis or ping-pong and thus have a reason to be able to go to his house and find out who he lives with. He is a fun stalker (remember the genre of the series). The story follows Jack since he enters university and has to live with Danny (Jon Pointing), a boy 7 years older who left school due to personal problems and is now resuming his career. An unlikely friendship develops between the two, both being at very different ends of the “masculinity spectrum.” Every so often, when Danny sees him arrive at the bedroom they share with two other friends, he tells him: “Hey, but look who's here: the stalker. Any information on Tim Gay?”

China decriminalized homosexuality in 1997.
The Chinese-French co-production “Seek McCartney” represented China at the Cannes Film Festival in 2014. It is about a romance between two men, an Asian man and a young Frenchman. The film is directed by Chinese director Wang Chao and stars Chinese singer and actor Han Geng (who carried the torch at the 2008 Beijing Olympics) and French performer Jérémie Elkaïm. Jeremie Elkaim plays the equivalent role of Jim Halpert in the French version of The Office). All this is verifiable.
Seek McCartney was shown in 2015 in cinemas in China. The film The Dead End, directed by Baoping Cao, which includes a passionate kiss between two men, was presented that same year in cinemas in China. All this is verifiable.
In 1996, a year before homosexuality was decriminalized in China, Chinese cinema already had 'East Palace, West Palace', one of the best titles of Chinese gay cinema directed by Zhang Yuan and based on a story by the Beijing novelist. Wang Xiaobo. This film was selected at the 1997 Cannes Film Festival and went on to win three awards at the Mar del Plata Festival, Argentina.
"Spring Fever" is another Chinese film that represented China at the Cannes Film Festival. The protagonists, Qin Hao, Wei Wu and Chen Sicheng have steamy explicit sex scenes.

With the list of gay films I shared with you, which represents a tiny percent of the volume of gay films produced in China, are you still going to say that there is a NATIONAL ban by China's central government on gay content in films/dramas/television? and all the other media? If so, where are these films filmed and produced? On Pluto or Neptune to circumvent censorship? China even goes with those same films to tour film festivals in Europe, the United States and other parts of the world, such as Cannes, Venice, etc. I have said several times: the list of Chinese gay films is available on MDL. You can consult it. Can you deny me and prove that those films do not exist, that it is my invention?
I showed you about the Beijing Film Festival awarding gay films that you denied was true. It is even a session of a national film festival, one of the most important in the world, perhaps the most important in all of Asia, dedicated solely and exclusively to gay cinema. Can you refute its existence? Can you prove that said Beijing film festival does not exist and is my invention?
I have proven to you too much that it is in the United States where censorship is done, and not only in film or television, but also in theater, literature, visual arts, radio and other arts. Why do you continue denying the obvious, when you have not been able to refute a single one of my arguments, while I do not stop providing new evidence? You only repeat matrices of opinion arising from the media and farms of haters, bots and anti-Chinese trolls, while I provide evidence that refutes what you stated.
For China you write the word National in capital letters, implying that censorship in that country has a national scope, but when you refer to the United States (which by the way, by doing so you are acknowledging its existence) you say that it has no scope. national and that it is only a question of isolated states where there are homophobes. It is not true that it is in isolated states. Most states have anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-immigration, anti-worker laws, and other states are studying implementing them or have projects already presented to state congresses for study and approval.
But it doesn't all end there: I ask you: With book censorship alone, does the American Library Association (ALA) have national reach or does it only represent one or several districts or one or two or three North American states? It's national in scope, right? So how can a nationwide censorship in the United States be positive, can it be insignificant and despised for you, and that same nationwide censorship in China or elsewhere be negative? How do you explain this? Is there good censorship and bad censorship? Is it that one censure is positive according to the observer and another censure is negative according to the same observer? Is it good that young Americans cannot read an LGBT+ themed book, while Chinese young people not being able to read the same or a similar LBGT+ themed book is bad? How to understand this?
Look, I see that this debate is going nowhere. It's a byzantine discussion and I don't have time to talk to a wall. Therefore, unless you have something important to share, let's leave this conversation. The boring ones don't interest me. I work with those who are passionate.

In a context of extreme political polarization, in 2022, 1,269 requests for censorship of books were received in the United States, particularly works by or about the LGTBI community and people of color, almost double that of 2021, the American Library reported this Thursday. Association (ALA).
In total, 2,571 titles were subject to censorship in 2022, compared to 713 the previous year and 156 in 2020, marking a new record since this United States library association, created 140 years ago, began collecting this type of information 20 years ago.

In the United States, a teacher can be fired for showing Michelangelo's sculpture of David to her students. This happened to teacher Hope Carrasquilla, at a school in Tallahassee, the capital of Florida, for having shown the famous sculpture to students between 11 and 12 years old. In March 2023, the teacher, with 20 years of experience, received an ultimatum from the management of this educational center in the United States, where the Renaissance nude of Michelangelo's David caused fear among some parents.

Children can no longer read To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee's bestseller published in 1960. Words like nigger are too insulting and offensive, according to several parents who forced a school in the state of Mississippi (United States) to remove this novel from school readings. Visitors to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York should also not admire the painting Thérèse dreaming, painted by Balthus in 1938. For eleven thousand people, those who signed a manifesto demanding its removal, it is “sexually suggestive” and casts a dirty look? on the bodies of minors. Nor is the painting made by white artist Dana Schutz of the photograph of Emmett Till, a teenager lynched by two white men in Mississippi in 1955, legal. Several artists and exhibition curators even called for its destruction when it was exhibited at the Whitney Museum Biennial. from Washington.

Censorship not only occurs in films, television, theater. Books are also censored. There is an avalanche of book censorship in America's libraries.
The number of works persecuted is nine times greater than 20 years ago, according to the American Library Association. The most affected are those with LGTBI themes
The 13 most persecuted books in 2022 and 2023, according to
American Library Association (ALA)
are:
1. Gender Queer by Maia Kobabe, for LGTBIQ+ content and explicit sex.

2. Not All Boys Are Blue by George M. Johnson, due to LGTBIQ+ content and explicit sex.

3. Toni Morrison's Blue Eyes, for depictions of sexual abuse and foul language.

4. Flamer by Mike Curato, for LGTBIQ+ content and explicit sex.

5.Looking for Alaska by John Green, for LGTBIQ+ content and explicit sex.

6. The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky, for LGBTQIA+ content, depiction of sexual abuse, drug use, and profanity.

7. Lawn Boy by Jonathan Evison, for LGTBIQ+ content and explicit sex.

8. The Completely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie, for explicit sexual content and profanity.

9. Out of the Darkness by Ashley Hope Perez, for explicit sexual content.

10. A Court of Fog and Fury by Sarah J. Maas, for explicit sexual content.

11. Ellen Hopkins Crank for explicit sexual content and drug use.

12. An ending for Rachel by Jesse Andrews, for profanity and explicit sexual content.

13. This book is gay by Juno Dawson, due to LGTBIQ+ advocacy and explicit sexual content.

In a previous comment I made reference to how it is prohibited in several states in the United States to bring homosexual representation into the classroom in textbooks, educational videos, etc. Well, that same argument is used to censor films and even cartoons. "Parents have trusted Alabama Public Television for more than 50 years to provide children with programs that entertain, educate and inspire." This is what the director of the ATP, Mike Mckenzie, said to explain how as recently as May 2019, public television in the state of Alabama censored an episode of the legendary children's series “Arthur” because it shows a gay wedding between two teachers. The censored chapter is "Mr. Ratburn and the Special Someone", which narrates a wedding that Arthur, the protagonist of the legendary production, attends with his parents and in which one of his teachers marries a man. "Arthur" is an award-winning children's cartoon series produced since 1996 by American public television (PBS), the same company responsible for "Sesame Street."
This is not the first time that the television station has refused to broadcast an episode in which homosexual people appear, as it has already censored another episode in which a friend of Arthur's had two mothers.
The person in charge then explained that "his feeling" is that the network "has the trust of parents in its programming and this specific program "did not fit with that."
Passages, the latest film by American Ira Sachs, released in 2023, suffered censorship in the United States. "Filmmakers of my generation think that a truly homosexual theme will not be able to be financed, that the industry will not approve a gay theme," said the filmmaker, committed through cinema to the defense of homosexual rights. Ira Sachs once again stood up to the controlling system, what he calls an industry "dominated by the cowardice of money."
The filmmaker added: “with the exception of Pedro Almodóvar and some other filmmakers, films are not made about their most personal themes, because they have the feeling that the film industry is not going to approve a gay theme and they think that a truly homosexual theme will not be approved.” "It's going to be able to be financed, they're not going to be able to lift the project."
The remake of 'Beauty and the Beast,' which includes the first "exclusively gay moment" in Disney history, suffered censorship in many states. The censored scene in Bill Condones' film is the one that shows the servant Le Fou (played by Josh Gad) and Gaston (Luke Evans), the gentleman he serves and desires.
In 1998, the play Corpus Christi was censored, which under the direction of Terrence McNally was premiered by the Manhattan Theater Club theater company in New York. The work depicted “a gay character similar to Jesus who has sexual relations with his apostles.” It was released some time later in limited, non-public spaces. As a result of this, the documentary Corpus Christi: Playing with Redemption was filmed in 2012, which narrates the social phenomenon that sparked the work.
The video A fire in my belly, by David Wojnarowicz, was removed from the exhibition Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture, which opened at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.
I'll tell you what happened: For the first time in its history, the Smithsonian cultural complex, under whose umbrella the National Portrait Gallery lives, dared to organize a homosexual-themed exhibition that explores the role of sexual difference and desire in the representation of the modern United States. With works by more than 100 artists ranging from Jasper Johns to Andy Warhol and Catherine Opie, the exhibition addressed how the main themes of modern art have been influenced by social marginalization and how art reflects the evolution and changing attitudes of society. society.
In this context, the work A fire in my belly by the New York creator David Wojnarowicz, who died of AIDS in 1992, made perfect sense since it was conceived as a cry of pain and complaint at society's indifference towards the AIDS patients in 1987. But there are those who considered it intolerable that a group of ants intermittently appeared there climbing a crucifix, oblivious to the immoral nature of their act. What a heresy!
A blogger from the conservative organization Media Research Center, Penny Starr, cried foul in an article published on November 29 about 'the horrors' shown in the exhibition and in just 24 hours, the video had disappeared. What? What happened between the publication of his words and the withering censorship? First, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights (a private group with no direct affiliation to the Catholic Church and openly homophobic) tweets Starr's article, calls the expose 'anti-Christian' and invites its followers to complain by email. before G. Wayne Clough, secretary of the Smithsonian Museum, who began to receive complaints. Starr proceeded to write to some congressmen and asked them if they thought the National Portrait Gallery exhibit, which included an "ant-covered crucifix" and "homoerotic" images, should be canceled since it is publicly funded. In his email there was an error: the Smithsonian receives public money but the exhibition was financed by the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts and various gay and lesbian support organizations. Since no one cared to verify the information, only speed mattered, the email was leaked to the press, the news began to spread like wildfire among conservative American television stations and Republican leaders John Boehner and Eric Cantor soon appeared before the cameras, denigrating to the exhibition and in particular, against Wojnarowitcz's piece (for being the one cited in the email since none of them went to see the exhibition, as they later acknowledged). Among the things Congressman Cantor said was a veiled threat against the Smithsonian, which could lose part of its annual budget.
Conclusion: the video was ordered to be removed.
Gay and lesbian rights groups mobilized. The protests multiplied. The PEN American Center wrote a letter asking the Smithsonian to review its decision because "it goes against the American values ​​that the Smithsonian represents and against the position of defending freedom of expression that the United States has defended before the world." One of the curators of the exhibition, Jonathan Katz, publicly complained that no one had consulted him. The American Museum Association condemned congressmen's censorship and threats against the Smithsonian. The Andy Warhol Foundation warned that it will withdraw its donations if the work does not return to the exhibition. Institutions across the country offered to display the video within their walls, and eventually MOMA announced the acquisition of the video for its permanent collection.
The story doesn't end here. While the world of the arts was clamoring for the head of the secretary of the Smithsonian Museum, the committee of directors of this institution met to give it its support and tried to save face by preparing a document that from now on will govern controversial situations such as the caused by this exhibition and forces the management to commit "not to make changes to an exhibition without consulting with the entire board of directors of the museum." The work can now be seen in an 'improvised museum' inside a van called 'Museum of Censored Art' set up outside the Smithsonian in Washington DC and on the website http://vimeo.com/17650206. There are many other examples. It would take me years, but little by little I would be able to share them.
About China, you just do what would be expected. Share publications from sites or media, such as BBC, participants in the anti-China campaign.

When you don't have arguments you always try to disqualify others. That's why you say things like "Why are you spreading this BS?" or “You need to write less and think more” or “You're embarrassing yourself.”
Well, you recognize that there are homophobes in the United States and blah blah blah. Well, then I think you should dedicate yourself to worrying about the situation of LGBTQ people in the United States and leave the Chinese for a better time. Be careful, if in the paradigm country of human rights and freedom there are problems with homosexuals, the most logical thing would be to think that the same or worse happens in the rest of the world.
But there is not only a violation of the human rights of members of the LGBT+ community. There is also institutionalized and systemic racism, racial discrimination, neo-fascism, white supremacy, violent police... and when all this is combined against LGBT+ people
They are individual states, but every day the others have been presenting laws against LGBT+ people. On the other hand, the state that has not presented an anti-homosexual bill today, what or who guarantees that it will not do so tomorrow? Just by having a Republican become governor or having a majority in the state congress, the possibility of presenting and approving laws against LGBT+ people increases to a thousand.
Regarding gay films censored in the United States: censorship comes in different ways, often indirectly. For example, granting the film a category of “only for those over 18 years old”, or asking its creators for cuts directly in its editing and post-production. Not obtaining any monetary aid for the production of the film due to the explicitness of its theme in the twenty-first century and in a country that boasts of freedom. Directors and producers unable to film because the necessary money did not appear. They request it from cultural, film, etc. organizations, and they are reluctant to grant it due to the topic in question. An edition designed to eliminate from the film the (possible) reluctance that the viewer less interested in male figures might feel. Protests from conservative sectors, the church, etc., even with the burning of movie theaters or the purchase of entrance tickets so that the public does not enter, cancellation of screenings. Shelved scripts that are never filmed. Refusals by film companies and companies to film the work or give money or the artistic cast to film. Many times the public doesn't even find out. Women have suffered double discrimination: for being women and for their sexual status. The production of titles is less than that of male homosexual discourses. Use of stereotypes. Actors and actresses are forced not to film or assume the stereotypes incorporated into the characters.
North American filmmakers, also from other places, have a lack of opportunities, especially gay artists. They do not have the opportunity to develop their work. They make one or two feature films at most and then, if they want to survive, they make series, they have no choice, otherwise, they don't eat. If they plan to develop a career like Fellini's, for example, who had sixty years to develop his cinema... they know that there will be bad and good films in all that time, time that filmmakers now do not have to explore the limits. For example, superhero movies are great at erasing all individualism, all vulnerability and all sexuality, which is very convenient for the capitalist system.
Through the film production code called the Hays Code, between 1934 and 1967, the implicit representation of homosexuality in the cinema of that country was avoided.
However, in conservative thought it is still valid.