Mdelrey

Is this BL?

Thx

Is this BL or bromance?

It's true

I think they might be homosexual, what do y'all think?

It’s so good!!!

Thailand just legalized gay marriage! ❤️ We have come a long way :)

8.8 rating?!? Wow, isn’t that the highest rating on MDL for a BL?

You're right. Even in animes like "Aggretsuko" that rings true, haha.

Babe looks so much like Mix. They're bot very handsome

Thanks everyone! I will give it a try then :)

Do the leads have good chemistry?

Toki reminds me of Namjoon from BTS :)

Soooo good

I think it’s a cultural thing that makes a difference

The rating finally went up! :)

Well, If you look at my comment again, I didn't exactly say that a company representing a certain demographic was a right. I simply gave an example of an instance where you would deem us as "immoral", because of what we believe in. And I used that example of the queer demographic having the same rights as heterosexuals because as far as I'm concerned, the Catholic church only believes that the right to marry, for instance, should be only between a man and a woman; correct me if I'm wrong. And how pathetic of you to bring up such a weak argument going as far as asking me to envision myself as a three-year-old when you know I can't answer that in order to deviate and distract from your inability to correlate high crime and social progress to each other, lol. And to refer to your statement about the left being intolerant, I'm not sure who you're talking about on the left as you were pretty vague about it. Sure, there are people on the left who would say that, but I'm not sure how you would prove that you would get the same intolerant response from everyone on that political leaning. See, as opposed to you, I used a real-life example of what the right is actually doing legislatively, and exposing how hypocritical they are when they are targeting one demographic and avoiding and ignoring what's going on in their churches where actual reported sexual abuse happens, so I like I said earlier; they want to use drag queens as a scapegoat, and I still stand by that. And fine, let's say you actually don't hate the alphabet people (although, your rhetoric suggests otherwise), because your argument is that you want them to be "saved" and go to the "afterlife" you and all the Christians and whatnot. Well, news flash: As far as I know, heaven is something that people believe in, meaning it's not an actual place that one can say with a guarantee that it is real. So, if one is not religious and doesn't believe in all those things, then you're not really doing them a favor by saying that you want them to be saved. It's just words, it doesn't mean anything to them. But I do understand your argument. Basically, for example, if you told me not to commit the crime of stealing, I wouldn't believe you actually hate me, I’d think most likely don't want to see me go to prison. Well, prison is an actual proven place, heaven, not so much. And that's fine you believe in heaven, and I totally respect that but you shouldn't use that as an excuse to be all righteous and to justify your intolerance because you think you know what's in other's best interest, well surprise! : you don't. And also, just a correction: I basically said I reject the premise of humans not accepting each other fundamentally for the "good reasons" which I'm not 100% sure what you were referring to by that. But I have an idea, and I'm guessing it had to do with "salvation"; that's what I was disagreeing on. And also my point of mentioning how there are also heterosexuals who sexually abuse kids was to prove that both sides (no matter what you sexually identify with), have been guilty of this crime, so don't act and pretend as if it were just an issue happening because of one group of people, which is obviously not true. And I'm not sure where you got the idea that I'm getting my information from Jews. I clearly stated that I got my information from the New York Times, lol. And yes, sodomy does mean anal sex which I did not say otherwise, but that's such an archaic word to refer it to, which is often used by those with an intolerance toward it. But hey; at least you acknowledge it is not just exclusive to one group. Also, you mentioned how alphabet people are feeding off of others and how we talked more than we produce; you have not provided any actual evidence of that And just to fact-check you there: California and NJ (yes, "woke" states, whatever that means) produce some of the most revenue in the country. According to Moneygeek, NJ (where I'm proudly from), is the state that least depends on federal aid. and also, according to Statista, it states, "In the fiscal year of 2022, the state of California collected a total of 280.83 billion U.S. dollars in tax revenue, the highest of any state". One of the reasons is that their population is taxed to the moon and back, but that's not the point. The point is, your facts are obviously flawed and you know it. And you're wrong; I by no means want our constitutional rights to become absolute so that's a conversation you should be having with those who would rather sell their kidney than having their 2nd amendment somehow "violated", which I'm sure you know many of. And no, pride month is a celebration to commemorate all of the people who protested and marched for us within the community to have the same rights as anyone else; so cheers to that

First of all, I just want to state if you felt offended by the statement I made about bigots not knowing the difference between harmless gay content and inappropriate content involving gay content (which is very different, by the way), It was not my intention. To be fair, if you read my comment, you will realize I did not personally call you a bigot, or for that matter, even name-called you in any instance. But you know what they say: if the shoe fits, wear it ;) I mean, I can argue all day how your rhetoric is that of a bigot. For example, how you only describe gay content as disgusting and inappropriate for kids, instead of stating something of the effect that mainstream content in general is getting more and more explicit and inappropriate. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by going around anything you say, I think I answered all of your questions pretty directly. But anyway, I'm still confused about how morality is objective, if everyone has different definitions of what is good and bad, no matter how much general consensus we may share about certain issues, there will always be deviance of what we each deem as "good and "bad". For example, I can think you have bad morality or a lack of morals for believing every homosexual is a pedophile or believing somehow that pedophilia and bestiality are connected to each other. The same concept applies to you, for example, you believe that others and I and apparently the important folks from Netflix are immoral or our morals are being "destroyed" because we believe those deviating from heterosexuality (or the "alphabet" people as you like to call it, whatever that means anyway) deserve to have the same rights as those like yourself, who practice heterosexuality, or that we believe homosexuals deserve to have representation on the big screens and in the mainstream media. And that's completely fine we disagree on what is morally good and what is immoral, but the premise that there is some sort of universal consensus of morality that we all have for everything is something I have a hard time wrapping my head around. And even though you did not exactly say the country's destruction is currently happening, you did state that the initiative (in this case, the normalization of homosexuality, or as you describe it: pedophilia), of something, will lead to a country's destruction. So you're insinuating that it will cause destructive activity in some current day, so there's not much difference between what I thought you said and what you actually said. And, I don't think it's fair to blame rampant "murder, theft, assault, rape" and other crimes on the normalization of homosexuality. I'm not sure how you could possibly back up that claim, by successfully making the connection that more social justice and social progress in a society will lead to more crime. But, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt, because you haven't yet proved to me how those things correlate to each other. The same could be said, if for example, I stated "All of the countries ranking in the bottom of quality of life, like Yemen or Afghanistan or Somalia rank low because of their lack of social laws protecting social groups like the queer community and other minorities, and that's what is preventing them from advancing on the top of the list (although, some would argue the lack of protection for minorities can halt a country's success on increasing quality of life). And I find it hilarious that you dare criticize me for assuming your feelings, then immediately proceed to commit the same action you were once condemning me for doing, lol. And you seem to contradict yourself; how do you claim to not hate something, (in this case, an entire group of people), but shamelessly insult them by generalizing their whole community (that you probably don't even take the time to hear them out and get to know them) by degrading them to one insulting word: pedophiles. I don't see how you cannot see the correlation between your rhetoric and just pure hatefulness. And I would beg to differ on the premise that there is a problem teaching children that fundamentally humans do not accept each other for "good" reason, since your definition of a good reason is most likely very different from what I envision it to be since you would probably make a connection of salvation and abstaining from what is sinful, based on what you said about being a Catholic and I am not religious by any means, and could care less about salvation. What if we don’t want to be saved, simply because we have no interest in it or we don’t believe in Heaven? And that’s completely fine. Don’t push your Christian agenda on us. Also, you decided to deviate from confronting my original demand which was to compare the number of sexual child abusers specifically among drag queens versus the number of sexual child abusers among priests, since your claim was found to be refuted; again, I can wait. And if you want to go there, we can also compare how many proven cases of heterosexuals have sexually abused children versus how many proven cases of people in within the "alphabet" community have sexually abused children. I'm assuming you will not like the results. The fact is that sex abuse targeting minors in church, specifically Catholic churches (yes, Catholic), is rampant here in the U.S., specifically in Illinois. The New York Times says that "a new report covering decades names more than 450 credibly accused sexual abusers, including priests and lay religious brothers". But do you see this massive movement coming from the left legislatively targeting church leaders, or proposing to ban children from attending church? No, because in theory, I admit that is a horrible idea, I just mentioned it to prove a point. And I don't know where you live but here in the US. there is a separation between church and state, as opposed to the integration of bigotry and state; you know, it’s called good ole secularism :) And also, if you didn't know, there are religious churches that teach kids religious content. Buy anyway, let me understand, your problem is not teaching 5-year-olds about sexual intercourse between a man and a woman (although, anal sex, or sodomy as you like to call it, is obviously not limited to homosexual males), but teaching them about all forms of sexual penetration including anal sex is the problem; got it. And I'm not sure what you mean by them being "parasitic" in taking in more money and resources than they produce, it'll help if you can elaborate on that. As far as I'm concerned, they pay their fair taxes just like anybody else does, not like your rich church officials that are exempt from paying property taxes. And just to add a fact, since you went there: U.S. states with higher populations of the "alphabet" community, like Washington state and New Jersey have depended way less on federal assistance than red states that often discriminate against homosexuals, like West Virginia and Mississippi. It's a proven fact that "red" states are more dependent on federal government money than “blue” states; search it up yourself. As far as the islands with all the alphabet people, I've never heard of that ridiculous proposition and I'm not sure why that would even be considered. Thankfully, as I said previously, much of the developed world and slowly the whole world is accepting the alphabet people into society, so there would be no need to make an island just exclusive for them. And also, you did not refute my statement that a piece of legislation that requires decades or generations for its receivers to actually feel any negative impact from it is most likely not as detrimental or harmful to a population. I guess we agree on something, right? Lol. Oh, I forgot to say and congratulate you that recently a conservative Tennessee court judge ruled a draconian public drag ban in Tennessee unconstitutional!! Mess with our 1st amendment and see what happens. So cheers to that and happy pride month to you. Have fun crying snowflake tears for seeing rainbows for the rest of June <3

well, you suggested normalizing homophobia and promoting gay content are the first steps toward destroying a country. I'm unsure what you meant by that since you didn't mention precisely how these things would "destroy" a country. You just mentioned how it would basically destroy our morals but that is subjective, it's not necessarily something that can be proven. And you also pointed out an important fact that many of the countries that have pushed for the "alphabet's" rights (as you hysterically called it) are already countries that are developed. Well, that's precisely my point; if we're talking about the quality of life and happiness index, then integrating homosexuality as a norm in these countries has not affected them. For Example, most of the developed world, like Australia, Switzerland, Israel and Taiwan (Not just Europe and the western world, lol) all have pushed some sort of legislation (like same-sex marriage and anti-discrimination laws), over the last few years and it has not affected them or "destroyed" them as you vaguely stated. That's if we're talking about those factors that I mentioned that make a country "successful", I guess you can say. Also, how detrimental can a piece of legislation be, for example, an anti-discrimination in housing on the basis of sexual orientation, if it takes decades for it to actually start negativity impacting people’s lives? Lol. And I think it's important to distinguish inappropriate content from content that simply promotes and normalizes homosexuality. I don't think those two concepts should be used interchangeably. Only bigots and those with a deficiency of tolerance are incapable of differentiating the two. There's nothing wrong with teaching our kids to accept others regardless of their sexual orientation. Something that you mentioned that is completely different from simply embracing different sexual orientations to children, was flashing adult-related stuff in front of them which should not be accepted, in my opinion. But who are we to decide if parents want to take their kids to a pride parade? I don't think that should be up to any stranger or politician to decide. And, I don't know if you follow American politics, but right now, the conservative-right politicians are raging culture wars on drag queens and making them their scapegoats because they basically want us to think their sole purpose is just to "save and protect" the kids from pedophiles, and so forth. However, they do not have the balls to go after churches and ban kids from attending church, despite there being hundreds of accused sexual abusers, including priests and religious folks. Now, compare how many children have been proven sexually abused by drag queens to the amount of times children have been proven sexually abused by priests and religious members of the church; go on, I’ll wait. Now, I'm not saying that proposition should be legislatively considered by any means, but do you comprehend the hypocrisy and the disingenuous nature coming from mostly the die-hard conservatives?

"Destroying" a country, lol. what're you talking about? Some of the most developed and prosperous countries have the most rights for LGBT community and have had them for years.