I feel like the personalities aren't well defined.

last edited at Jul 8, 2017 12:36AM

I'm the type that makes people uncomfortable.

I feel bad, because on the one hand it sucks that Japan is so conservative with LGBT issues compared to many of its allies, but on the other hand I love the dorama that it brings.

Can't wait for more...

Finally updated

How could this possibly continue?

Thry have sex but are not in a relationship so...
Probably more beating, Iori falls in love or gets hurt, rampage of Minami cuz she loves Iori.

I'm the type that makes people uncomfortable.

I feel bad, because on the one hand it sucks that Japan is so conservative with LGBT issues compared to many of its allies, but on the other hand I love the dorama that it brings.

Actually Japan was never against LGBT people. After the Americans took over that stigma was created. Japan is also one of the most accepting country's in sex or kings.

Good going Iori chan, you sure did score an amazing human on your first try the other side of the fence xD

I love this comment!

Using "they" as singular is grammatically wrong, so Minami saying "parent" and then "they" would traditionally not make sense. However, I think here she is referring to a single parent and using "they" as a gender-neutral singular pronoun. And I agree that it is likely done as not to bring too much focus on the parent. The key things to take away is that Minami is being abused.

The translator has to use "they" like that to avoid making an assumption. In Japanese there's simply no pronoun used, which is just normal. The use of 親 rather than something gender specific also doesn't really stand out in Japanese like it's some deliberate thing, so there's probably nothing much to read into it.

The use of 親 rather than something gender specific also doesn't really stand out in Japanese like it's some deliberate thing, so there's probably nothing much to read into it.

Yeah, this was what I was getting at with my original question. I wasn't confused by grammar in any way.

Using "they" as singular is grammatically wrong,

This is absolutely false.

Singular "they", as a generic term for unknown people whose gender is not known, has been in common use in English since at least the 14th century and is absolutely an accepted part of standard English grammar.

Further, singular "they" where referring to known individuals, such as those who are nonbinary and so forth, is accepted by the AP Style Guide, the Washington Post Style Guide, the Oxford English Dictionary, Mirriam-Webster English Dictionary, and pretty much all other major references on English grammar.

Using "they" as singular is grammatically wrong,

This is absolutely false.

Singular "they", as a generic term for unknown people whose gender is not known, has been in common use in English since at least the 14th century and is absolutely an accepted part of standard English grammar.

Further, singular "they" where referring to known individuals, such as those who are nonbinary and so forth, is accepted by the AP Style Guide, the Washington Post Style Guide, the Oxford English Dictionary, Mirriam-Webster English Dictionary, and pretty much all other major references on English grammar.

Nez is right about that, it reminds me of when I helped create a project marking scheme in college. We weren't allowed to use "he" or "she" to refer to a single person.

Using "they" as singular is grammatically wrong,

This is absolutely false.

Singular "they", as a generic term for unknown people whose gender is not known, has been in common use in English since at least the 14th century and is absolutely an accepted part of standard English grammar.

Further, singular "they" where referring to known individuals, such as those who are nonbinary and so forth, is accepted by the AP Style Guide, the Washington Post Style Guide, the Oxford English Dictionary, Mirriam-Webster English Dictionary, and pretty much all other major references on English grammar.

Nez is right about that, it reminds me of when I helped create a project marking scheme in college. We weren't allowed to use "he" or "she" to refer to a single person.

Historically, you are correct. Using "they" as singular has been done for a very long time, but "they" singular has been considered grammatically incorrect for at least as long. Those references on English grammar have only adopted "they" singular relatively recently to match the social development of using gender neutral terms. Therefore, in the last 5 years or so this use of they has become accepted as grammatically acceptable.

However, a lot of educational institutions taught "they" as only plural before this. And those references did not include "they" singular at that time. So, no. What I said was not "absolutely" wrong. It is just a matter of getting accustomed to changing times and language. "You" used to be exclusively plural, but that is not the case today.

last edited at Jul 8, 2017 8:44PM

This is right up my alley, and I absolutely love the usage of the flashbacks. Can't wait to see where this goes, even if they choose common tropes in the end.

Using "they" as singular is grammatically wrong,

This is absolutely false.

Singular "they", as a generic term for unknown people whose gender is not known, has been in common use in English since at least the 14th century and is absolutely an accepted part of standard English grammar.

Further, singular "they" where referring to known individuals, such as those who are nonbinary and so forth, is accepted by the AP Style Guide, the Washington Post Style Guide, the Oxford English Dictionary, Mirriam-Webster English Dictionary, and pretty much all other major references on English grammar.

Nez is right about that, it reminds me of when I helped create a project marking scheme in college. We weren't allowed to use "he" or "she" to refer to a single person.

Historically, you are correct. Using "they" as singular has been done for a very long time, but "they" singular has been considered grammatically incorrect for at least as long. Those references on English grammar have only adopted "they" singular relatively recently to match the social development of using gender neutral terms. Therefore, in the last 5 years or so this use of they has become accepted as grammatically acceptable.

I am also correct in modern times. As I mentioned before, you'd be very hard-pressed to find a modern reference that doesn't use third-person singular "they" in cases where the gender is unknown. Which is absolutely the case here.

It doesn't matter if they adopted "they" relatively recently because we live in the current time, not the 19th century when there was a movement to use the generic "he" instead. It is totally acceptable in 2017 to use a singular, third-person "they". Which was, you will note, the issue in the first place.

Plus, when it comes to dialogue in fiction being understandable to an English-speaking audience is what matters and as mentioned before, people know what it means, therefore it's acceptable to use.

I'm the type that makes people uncomfortable.

I feel bad, because on the one hand it sucks that Japan is so conservative with LGBT issues compared to many of its allies, but on the other hand I love the dorama that it brings.

Actually Japan was never against LGBT people. After the Americans took over that stigma was created. Japan is also one of the most accepting country's in sex or kings.

What existed prior to the American occupation is entirely irrelevant to modern day stories set in Japan. The truth of the matter is that only in a few areas of Japan are same sex relationships even recognized as remotely legitimate. They are on par with the majority of the rest of east Asia, with the exception of Taiwan, when it comes to this, however. The book "Queer Japan" detailed quite clearly what the experience of the LGBTQ+ population of Japan was like in the later part of the 20th century, which was largely being ignored, overlooked, and politely considered to not exist unless they caused trouble.

However, even before the American occupation, there was an expectation of women that they would "grow out" of that "phase" of their lives, marry, and have children if they "experimented" with same sex relationships during their school years. The "Class-S" literature of the early 20th century in Japan was full of stories where the women graduated and moved on. The behavior wasn't necessarily considered wrong, it was just considered a phase of youth. That is not a particularly positive LGBTQ+ position.

Also... I have no idea what you mean by " most accepting country's in sex or kings." please explain!

As for this story, it could very well be the case that Minami is helping to support her parents if they are that far gone on drugs. It also doesn't say how old she is. (Of course, if the's under 18, it would probably be a bad thing for Iori at this point... With that many tattoos, I doubt that she's that young.)

BTW... Does anyone know if it is Iori that is thinking the line "It's my relatives's hospital though"?

last edited at Jul 8, 2017 11:39PM

Using "they" as singular is grammatically wrong,

This is absolutely false.

Singular "they", as a generic term for unknown people whose gender is not known, has been in common use in English since at least the 14th century and is absolutely an accepted part of standard English grammar.

Further, singular "they" where referring to known individuals, such as those who are nonbinary and so forth, is accepted by the AP Style Guide, the Washington Post Style Guide, the Oxford English Dictionary, Mirriam-Webster English Dictionary, and pretty much all other major references on English grammar.

Nez is right about that, it reminds me of when I helped create a project marking scheme in college. We weren't allowed to use "he" or "she" to refer to a single person.

Historically, you are correct. Using "they" as singular has been done for a very long time, but "they" singular has been considered grammatically incorrect for at least as long. Those references on English grammar have only adopted "they" singular relatively recently to match the social development of using gender neutral terms. Therefore, in the last 5 years or so this use of they has become accepted as grammatically acceptable.

I am also correct in modern times. As I mentioned before, you'd be very hard-pressed to find a modern reference that doesn't use third-person singular "they" in cases where the gender is unknown. Which is absolutely the case here.

It doesn't matter if they adopted "they" relatively recently because we live in the current time, not the 19th century when there was a movement to use the generic "he" instead. It is totally acceptable in 2017 to use a singular, third-person "they". Which was, you will note, the issue in the first place.

Plus, when it comes to dialogue in fiction being understandable to an English-speaking audience is what matters and as mentioned before, people know what it means, therefore it's acceptable to use.

The only reason I brought it up was because there seemed to be some confusion as to what was meant as you have noted without noting that I made note of that in my first noting of notes. I said in my first reply "so Minami saying "parent" and then "they" would traditionally not make sense. However, I think here she is referring to a single parent and using "they" as a gender-neutral singular pronoun." I already noted it.

I never said it was unacceptable where in fact I said it was acceptable and I wasn't the first to bring up historical use of language. My only error where I was most certainly wrong was saying that they singular is grammatically wrong as an end all statement of which I corrected in the post before this one.

Time and change overlap, there are transitioning periods. Time and history do not stop and suddenly start again at a matter of social change. Current, now, it is all relative to what came before. As I said, "It is just a matter of getting accustomed to changing times and language." I'm not looking to further this discussion and I do no think there is anything to continue. Both of us have been partially wrong and partially right. And I learned something new which works for me, so...

While using "they" as a plural can be grammatically wrong depending on use, I think here in the story the author is using they as a gender-neutral singular pronoun. I assume this is done as not draw attention to the parent as the focus is that Minami has been abused.

last edited at Jul 9, 2017 12:15AM

Well I'm convinced.

I am also correct in modern times. As I mentioned before, you'd be very hard-pressed to find a modern reference that doesn't use third-person singular "they" in cases where the gender is unknown. Which is absolutely the case here.

It doesn't matter if they adopted "they" relatively recently because we live in the current time, not the 19th century when there was a movement to use the generic "he" instead. It is totally acceptable in 2017 to use a singular, third-person "they". Which was, you will note, the issue in the first place.

Plus, when it comes to dialogue in fiction being understandable to an English-speaking audience is what matters and as mentioned before, people know what it means, therefore it's acceptable to use.

I'll take any excuse to repost this dinosaur comics classic

last edited at Jul 9, 2017 12:15AM

Minami kind of reminds me of a turtle when she wears the bandanna. Especially in the middle panel on page two.

last edited at Jul 9, 2017 1:04AM

the story was all over the place there were no focus on anything at all so i can not relate to any of the characters or her problems so much stuff happen in a few pages the writting was so poor in general there was no character development at all like the author previous work now loading where the story build up to nothing so when the end arrives you feel like the author leave the stoy incomplete feels like so much stuff is happening yet the relationship is going nowhere like if you were wasting your time it s like if golden time end at the fifth episode just getting the couple together without developing their relationship

the story was all over the place there were no focus on anything at all so i can not relate to any of the characters or her problems so much stuff happen in a few pages the writting was so poor in general there was no character development at all like the author previous work now loading where the story build up to nothing so when the end arrives you feel like the author leave the stoy incomplete feels like so much stuff is happening yet the relationship is going nowhere like if you were wasting your time it s like if golden time end at the fifth episode just getting the couple together without developing their relationship

I'm imagining you stumbling that whole thing out in one breath.

the story was all over the place there were no focus on anything at all so i can not relate to any of the characters or her problems so much stuff happen in a few pages the writting was so poor in general there was no character development at all like the author previous work now loading where the story build up to nothing so when the end arrives you feel like the author leave the stoy incomplete feels like so much stuff is happening yet the relationship is going nowhere like if you were wasting your time it s like if golden time end at the fifth episode just getting the couple together without developing their relationship

Hoo-boy, if we're going to just argue grammar in this thread, we got this.

This is like your usual yaoi story. What a mess. Kek.

This is like your usual yaoi story.

What does this even mean?

So relentless up there. Why perpetuate it?

the story was all over the place there were no focus on anything at all so i can not relate to any of the characters or her problems so much stuff happen in a few pages the writting was so poor in general there was no character development at all like the author previous work now loading where the story build up to nothing so when the end arrives you feel like the author leave the stoy incomplete feels like so much stuff is happening yet the relationship is going nowhere like if you were wasting your time it s like if golden time end at the fifth episode just getting the couple together without developing their relationship

I felt the story thus far has decent direction. Fast for sure, but the situation was clear and I kind of like imagining how the characters got to the start of the story. I like to think that Minami has been in love with Iori for some time, but has never said anything, because of Iori's dating habits. But by being tightly embraced, Minami no longer could hold back. As for the incomplete feeling to the story, this is only chapter one, so it is a bit difficult to determine how everything will come together.

Personally, I like how the art has developed a bit. And as for relating to characters, I agree there could be more information, but again it is the first chapter and sometimes there simply are characters that one can not relate to.

This is like your usual yaoi story.

What does this even mean?

I'm curious too. Though I have never read yaoi.

last edited at Jul 9, 2017 3:08PM