Your existence IS political: An Essay on the Themes of the Second Episode of The Boy and I Who Will Break Up in 100 Days (Spoiler Alert)
This debate is not new. I have encountered the representation of the debate many times in Western media, most notably in the web series Husbands (2011 - 2013), and I think that this debate was mentioned briefly in Palm Royale (2024). Can I just opt out politically as a queer person from fighting for my existence? Personally, my answer is a firm no. No matter how low you try to fly your queer plane, you will never be able to escape contestations of your existence be it against the state, your capitalist employer, people whom you consider friends, or against yourself. Political fight, communally, is the only way for you to make your existence acceptable for society, and for yourself.
The episode took us back to the first days of the shooting. The show was very smart in opening the episode with a homophobic joke, uttered by the documentary’s cameraman, that people usually made against gay people, “who’s the bottom?” As though our sex life is not already scrutinized enough by society, as though the question is pertinent at all when the documentary is about the daily struggles that a gay couple had to endure in a country that doesn’t recognize gay marriage.
Then, we saw Yuma came home with Itsuki at their house, right after the first meetup between them and the documentary team. The pair at first seemed to be interacting just fine, but when Yuma brought up how sad it was for one of his fishes to die, Itsuki tried to calm him down/to give it a bigger perspective (that it’s not a big deal), which was then proceeded with Yuma angrily defended his feeling of loss about his fish. I don’t think I experienced this with my ex nearing the days of our breakup, however, many troubled couples’ representations seem to have the same idea about what a dying/dead romantic relationship is: that landmines are everywhere. In one moment, you will feel fine and happy, then somehow you or your partner hit a landmine out of nowhere and incessant never-ending heated arguments ensue.
The next scene is why I’m very amped up to write this essay. During the first day of interview, Itsuki seemed to nitpick on everything that Yuma said, be it about Yuma’s decision to resign from his previous job or about privileges earned as a married couple. I labelled Itsuki as someone who has this edgy, non-conformist, avant garde soul, just like Kuji Shizuka (from LISB), someone who rejected the idea of wanting any acknowledgement of the state because the state is the first perpetrator of violence against queer people, then why should queer people beg for the perpetrator's acknowledgement. I think I’m utterly wrong in my characterization of him. After the first day shooting, Yuma asked Itsuki why he lied about not having a BL book and to add the lie that he’s not a reader, Itsuki then got huffy and insisted back that it was Yuma who has been lying all along, by proceeding with the documentary, about the resignation and the marriage privileges. I was so angry when Itsuki said that Yuma lied about the discrimination against gay people be it in the work place or through the institution of marriage. I utterly don’t think that Yuma is in the wrong, he never said that he was forced to resign or that he was fired, and thus, Itsuki’s snarky comment about the illegality of companies to fire gay people IS UTTERLY NOT WELCOME. Yuma did say that it was just easier for him to resign from his previous company, after his and Itsuki’s interview post-signing the partnership agreement became popular. Besides, the illegality to fire people based on sexual discrimination is not a nation-wide law. When processing the scene, I gave the benefit of the doubt to Itsuki first, that maybe he would like to give nuances to the phenomena, that not everything is black and white. However, I really don’t think that Yuma’s answers were that black and white in the first place. That’s when I realized, yup, the pair has drastically different perspectives of what their role is for the community, that Yuma emphasized on the plight of the community because he knew that’s how the public is going to be aware of how hard it is to be a non-heterosexual person in Japan. And Itsuki seems not to feel that responsibility, that for him, his existence is for him alone, those nitpick statements he made were proofs that he wants to convince to himself that his existence will probably be fine without being involved politically in the fight. I think my characterization of Itsuki is correct as even Yuma acknowledged to his supervisor in a later scene that his “partner” is someone who is really “go with the flow” person and don’t like people. Also, before moving on to the next point, kudos to the show for not making Yuma back down from his stance that he answered the interviewer correctly.
The usual line that the individualists will use in defending their stance of not being involved politically, is “why can’t I just be me?” [instead of being a political activist as well simply due to one’s identity] (something also said in Palm Royale). Well, the state doesn’t allow you to be you. Your biological family doesn’t allow you to be you. Your priest doesn’t allow you to be you. If we live in a society and everything is connected socially, how can you really be you if no one else allows you to be you? I can’t really talk all high mighty about this matter however. Speaking about this is easier when you have a job, when you have supportive parents like Yuma, when not all of your identities offend the society in general. It’s really a very thought-provoking episode. I don’t know how this show is going to resolve this theme, though. It seems that this theme is not going anywhere. In the next episode, Itsuki seems to be confronting Yuma about whether he lives his life for himself or for the community. A conflict line that was also used in Husbands (2011 - 2013). I for sure hope that the show can give a different answer of this dilemma than in other shows I have watched.
There were also some mentions about intersectionality between gender and queer liberations in the episode. Shiho, the main documentarian, was the one who disciplined the cameraman when he made that homophobic joke and wanted to genuinely ask Yuma and Itsuki the question. Shiho was also the one who was told by her cis male higher-up to have a “balance life” between her work and home life. Something that made my blood boil instantly. Her cis woman pregnant mentor who had the idea for the documentary, Naomi, also said explicitly in the Zoom meetup that there are intersections between the gender and queer movements. I think it was very good when Yuma’s supervisor said that she shouldn’t forgive all the microaggressions that she had to endure daily. I was quite surprised that Japanese companies are aware of gender proportional imbalance in their companies. Yuma’s supervisor is really the perfect representation of liberal, well-meaning, establishment, that he flaunted the company’s perks for all of their employees, including the gay employees, he flaunted the company’s gender employment stats in the company, yet, I can clearly see the glass that he erects to distinguish himself with those that he champions to have helped. I don’t know how this intersectionality is going to be used in future episodes, however, I’m really sat for this. The last time intersectionality was used in a BL was in Chosen Home (2025), and I was really appalled with the lack of solidarity even among cis-women that the episode presented, which might be the accurate representation.
I have not felt this challenged and uncomfortable by a piece of media in years. Gosh, I love it. The show tried to backtrack what they said in the pilot episode, that somehow now Yuma wanted to go back together with Itsuki. Maybe in the subsequent episodes, Yuma will try to make Itsuki like him back again, but he will fail. We all have seen the apology that Yuma made to the documentary team that he and Itsuki were already not a couple when the team contacted them. Who are the show trying to gaslight? Last point: What on earth is happening with cigarettes and Japanese BL? This how has Itsuki smoking, and smoking is an integral part of LISB lol
I cannot wait for the third episode. My trust of this show’s quality is getting stronger. Gosh, I’m so glad GagaOOLala has the right to distribute them.
dailybridgerton
jbbartram-illu
tangentwithtanner
titsay
dededos
ellievsbear
romaincrisis
