John Smith

Wouldn't a better choice be to believe facts, evidence, and proof than either side? You say you would rather defend a liar than a bully/rapist, but what if their lie was that the situation was the other way around? At some point, we might want or have to take a side without all of the facts, but I do not think that today has to be that day. I think that some of the comments made make it difficult for victims to want to come forward. I also think that even in some of those comments, that is not the intention.

Are we sure he was reformed? A vast majority of people did not know about this beforehand. Can you be sure of what he has been doing since? He just admitted so wrongdoing, so it seems a bit premature to deem him reformed.

There is no point in commenting on a comment that is not worth commenting on. That sounded weird, but I mean that it is obvious that you put some thought into what you wanted to get across and perhaps it did not come across the way you wanted. I just wanted to have the chance to understand what you wanted to say. You raised some important points, and I just tried to share my thoughts. I have received my fair share of criticism too. Saying one thing right does not make you always right, but neither does saying one thing wrong make you always wrong.

Thanks. It is obvious that the person put some thought into what they wanted to get across, so I felt like I wanted to share my thoughts as well. I suspect the commenter just wanted to have a choice. I can also understand the fear of having the choice taken away from you. I just do not think that this was such a case. This was a business decision, not a personal one. I have not kept up with the latest developments, but it is possible that this could air in some shape or form in the future. I have also checked, and there are still shows that he is in that are still available to watch.

You should probably bring your "copy and paste" statement of misunderstanding here as well. You need to clarify your remarks because I am unsure if you are implying hazing is not the exemption but the rule, or when it happens that it is not the exception but the rule that it involves assault and torture. To try to draw a parallel without making that crystal clear is insulting to adult males who have served bravely in the military, fraternity brothers who have helped their communities, athletic teams who bring economic benefits to universities and cities, and marching bands who are composed males who want to share their love of music with others.

And unless new information comes out, he is the biggest criminal. He should be judged fairly and punished accordingly. As far as culture, society, and institutions that play a role in allowing these things to happen, I think they are better off as a separate discussion or investigation. It is a conversation that should be had. I would imagine that they played some part, but I would be uncomfortable drawing any conclusions without as much of the facts as possible.

If it were "stupid" to delete someone from a movie or TV series because "netizens" want it, why aren't all shows still running, movies made into an infinite number of sequels, and child actors playing child parts even as senior citizens? Entertainment is created to entertain people. Why shouldn't we have a say in what is or is not available for entertainment? Wouldn't a tyranny force the masses to watch something that they might have no interest in seeing? Being an actor does not give you license to be free from the consequences of your action before, during, or after your career. It is a really poor comparison. Just from reading a sample of comments, most are not saying he needs to be deleted from existence. It is a serious situation. Let's do what we can to be sensitive to the issues at hand, and at the same time read the room and realize that continuing the drama might not be good financial sense as well. As for piracy, most people tend to frown on such things.

I do not think that a buzzword like cancel culture is appropriate in this situation. I know it is trendy and seems like it might fit, with cancel and culture being part of what is going on in the situation. Even the casual mention of "infamous leader" probably won't win many supporters if your goal is to offer some sort of support to him as his situation unfolds. There are a few total believers and a few total non-believers, but a vast majority seem to be more moderate in their understanding of the situation. There is another article that is focused on the cancelling of the filming of the drama and dropping him from the cast. That might be a more appropriate place for the topics you want to discuss.

They are literally those who manage. I am sure a good manager will have their jobs spelled out in as much detail as possible. I would imagine terms like slaves and whatever would be insulting to most managers.

There is a saying that pressure can bust pipes, but it can also make diamonds. Some of those who get bullied will overcome it and shine, and some may be crushed and feel the only way to not be bullied is to be a bully. Those are just two choices out of many. We can make assumptions, but they often have a way of being wrong, or at least not as true in the way we want to see them. Instead of attacking such statements, perhaps a better way would be to start a dialogue with the individual. That is not always possible, and some commenters just want to stir up trouble, but it might be the best way to show were each person stands on a particular issue.

Less English and more philosophy, but I get your point.
I would say that a lot of comments skew more towards emotional responses than logical ones. This is the internet. People might have to be respectful and thoughtful towards family and superiors, but they feel free to vent with no filter anonymously. When I read the first article, my first thought was probably "dang!" Thankfully, I decided not to post that. I read a little more, looked at the comments, used a search engine and translator, then tried to put myself in the shoes of various sides and weighed whether I even wanted to comment. Sometimes I see a comment that I can relate to and sort of piggyback on it and comment. Sometimes I see something so outrageous or factually incorrect, that I feel compelled to comment. And sometimes I feel like venting, but try to be respectful and thoughtful about it. 90% is a lot of comments to categorize as bullying, mean, and/or repulsive, but there are quite a few of them.
I want to think that some people did not believe it at first because they wanted to believe in him. Then they wanted to think that it is not as bad as some people are making it out to be. When the letter came out, they did not agree with what he had done, but wanted to support him. In defending him, some may have thought going on the offensive was only fair. Then a lot of the lack of civility was not about what had happened, but between commenters either being misunderstood or attacking each other. The lack of actual facts does not help ease any misunderstanding between commenters trying to have an actual discussion. There are also people that enjoying making comments with the sole purpose of angering or aggravating others. I think most commenters here realize that he did something wrong. I think that they also want more information. I hope that as time goes on (and we learn more), the comments will become more respectful, at least towards other commenters.

I did make a comment before about support does not mean agree, so I understand if there are people out there that still want to support him, and I hope others can respect that. I think how many are willing to support him, and in exactly what way will change as time goes on and more facts come out.

We are not all entitled to our opinions. Entitled to informed opinions, or at least ones that you can make an argument for. Being entitled to your opinion is not a shield you can raise in order to protect your opinion from being criticized nor should it be disrespectful to continue to argue that the opinion is not valid. An opinion is not a fact, but it should be as informed as possible.

For all the talk about forgiveness, shouldn't people wait to find out exactly what they are forgiving first? It seems early for final judgment or punishment, so shouldn't it be early for forgiveness as well? Even if someone is a blanket forgiver, shouldn't they wait until the bed is made?

I find it odd that you claim it is a delicate matter, and then proceed be vulgar. I also wonder how you know that no one else has been bullied like that, or that we lack the capacity to understand the psychological impact of such bullying. You also ask for people to refrain from judging any of the victims, yet are open the possibility that a bully can be a victim, but proceed to judge him as well.
On the questions you asked, of course we (since you mentioned society in the next question I assume you mean it here) can condemn (although I might use punish) someone for something they have done before becoming an adult. How much, how long, and in what way should be mentioned. As a society, of course we should have the right to hold people accountable for their wrong doings for the rest of their lives. Again, the context is important. Holding someone accountable could mean simply having people be aware, or the inability to hide such an incident might be accountable as well.

The actions and statements of the accused and victims have just recently been made public and emotions are running high. There is also the fact that there is some evidence, but not a lot of proof of everything that has happened. It is also worth noting that bullying is something most people can identify with, so empathy with victims is high as well. The accused is famous so you will have fans mobilizing as well. I am not surprised by the strong feelings, offensiveness, defensiveness, snap judgments, hypocrisy, misinformation, and misunderstandings that are all over comment sections.

I do hope that an investigation is started into what happened. I hope some authority will be entrusted to review the findings of an investigation, and that everyone's rights will be protected to ensure a sound decision and outcome for all involved.

Replacing the actor is probably the best way to go. I hope that due diligence is done on the replacement as a repeat would be terrible. I do not think it would be done, but why not use technology to blur the main lead's face? Everyone is put in an unenviable position because of one person. What about having a vote on what to do? Or shelving it temporarily. What about some sort of introductory statement before each episode? I do not know what punishment or consequences will follow, but should they even involve the drama? For the sake of everyone else in the drama and their families, can we separate the person from the character? Should he be given the power to bring down a whole drama? Are there laws about this that companies have to follow? Will a higher authority step in and make the decision for the drama?

I have yet to see the original, but I have no problems with remakes in general. As for actors to play the main leads, my first thought would be "extensive background checks."

I hope the fact that bullying is a complicated and broad reaching topic does not prevent people from trying to ask questions and find solutions. It would do the future a disservice if all that came out of this time of bullying controversies is outrage, denial, acceptance, apologies, settlements, and forced breaks, only to be forgotten and the status quo still remains the same.

A punishment would be beyond me to issue, but I do hope that all sides (and maybe authorities as well) can come to some sort of agreement. As usual, I would give extra points if it would be something that the public could accept as well.

I do not like to speculate on what might happen without knowing a fraction of what is actually going on, but it would make the most sense to settle with those involved. The letter even serves the purpose of admitting wrong without admitting to a wrong. That might be good for both parties but does not really do anything to solve the issue of bullying in general.

I wonder if any of this is covered in the contracts everyone signs. I doubt the laymen have any sort of protection or recourse when this happens though. Is cancelling the drama really the best course of action? Hopefully those who are most affected will be taken care of.

I would be curious to the catalyst that made him post that image of the letter. I am assuming he posted it since it was not immediately taken down. It looks to be handwritten, but is it his handwriting? Were those his words in his own voice put to paper? Did he make the decision to post it or did someone else tell him to? Is it an apology, a confession, or simply a delay tactic? That is just a few of the questions i asked myself as soon as I saw the post.

From the translated text of the letter I read, I found it very vague with the exception being the list of those associated with his current drama. I thought that was a little shameless and a bit insulting to those who in his words "suffered" because of him.

Misguided more so than bad. It is just not a good look overall to laugh.

I am trying to say in a serious conversation about facts, truth, opinion, justice, bullying, assault, victims, society, blame, cause, effect, support, agree, disagree, innocent, guilty, and any other thoughts and feelings shared in the comment sections, respect should be first and foremost.

Support is just what is sounds like. You choose to be there to help lift them up, keep them steady, or hopefully prevent them from falling. Agree is acceptance or approval. There is no mystery, no technicality, or trickery about support not being the same as agree.
I have a friend and they do something wrong. Do I agree? No. Do I stop being a friend? No. What I do is support them in hopes they will do better in the future.

Specifically about this article, I did see his letter that was posted on Instagram. It probably added more confusion than it did to settle any sort of outstanding questions other than he felt he has done something that has caused suffering to others. This might actually be a time when fans (who do not agree with what he did) should come forward to support him being more honest and forthcoming with the public, and especially those he caused suffering.

Surely if you know what sarcasm is, you are not making yourself look any better for using it, nor is it wrong to be supportive of someone when you want the best for them. Again, support does not mean agree.