Oh Golly!

Yay! A dane!! (≥‹≤)

I'm straight and female (not to mention real), and even before reading yaoi etc. wouldn't have been so stupid to think something like that. So either they've taken no time to do some basic research on "gay" like even meeting a few people who are and getting some knowledge of how to "act gay" like professionals or they're just bigoted idiots. Either way this just seems badly written.

Nice to meet you too! There seems to be more than a few Danish yaoi fans on site. I And some of our other fellow Scandinavians...

This is based off of a book written by a gay man. As in based of verbatim... the characters have the same names.

That may be very true. In fact I can well imagine that someone gay would think that straight people all think like this, even when their jobs demand better of them. Especially if the author is gay somewhere where there isn't the same cultural tolerance as some other places. Then from the gay perspective what would make the strongest impression of the general public is probably the most bigoted and stupid viewpoints, and it is easy to see if a person encounters those often enough how they may come to think that they are held by everyone straight.

i know u mean well with this comment and all but u said urself that u are in fact straight. being straight i dont rlly think u have the ability to speak over those who are gay over what is offensive or not. im not trying to be rude but as a gay guy, it does kind of get tiring having people speak for us on things they dont know. i think the writing is pretty realistic and yes stereotyping certain acts is unacceptable but there are people who have and still do think this way. im glad u know better than that but in general straight men do have these predjudices. hell, back when i thought i was straight i used to think the same thing. opinions change and so do people. i wouldnt dismiss it as bad writing right away, just give the characters more room to develop u know? and tbh reading ur arguments u seem to be defending straight people than gay people so honestly idk how what to say to u except that i hope u understand my point and try not to talk over us and determine whats offensive to us if u arent gay yourself. thanks

I was thinking the same thing

Look, what I'm saying is stereotyping is bad. And sure people do it, and it is wrong whether they're straight or gay, it doesn't matter. So if this story had been just been about a couple of handymen who for some reason thought there was something nefarious going on at a gay bar and had thought they would have to "dress up gay" to find out what it was, I would have been far more ok with it. For 2 reasons; in the context of a gay bar that sort of thing actually makes sense, and second, with the handyman type is where you are more likely to run into the worse sort of stereotypes and they have no professional reason to know better. But stereotyping all straight people together is as bad as stereotyping all gay people together. I thought it bad writing because the author never seemed to take into account that to go undercover you can't be that ignorant about what you're posing as. It would be as if someone went undercover as a handyman but knew nothing about tools and hadn't even gotten some experience from an actual handyman before going on construction site. Stupid and totally unprofessional, which is why I thought it bad writing.
To your other point, you misunderstood something. I don't think I particularly "spoke for gays". What I resented was the implication in the story that despite their professional obligation to know better, the cop characters for no other reason than because they are straight must have this idea. That is stereotyping as well. So if anything I spoke against stereotyping straight people.

i think you're forgetting the most important part; he doesn't have to go undercover and pretend to be a normal gay man; he has to go undercover and pretend to be a gay man that would love to become a gay porn actor and sell his body for money... there's a difference and personally i think he is nailing the porn actor lookXD (never watched porn tho but i can imagine ppl in pornos dressing like that)

He's going undercover as a gay student and part time handyman, and is hoping that he will be recruited by the porn industry there. Not quite the same thing. He might become a gay porn actor later. Besides, we and they have already been shown that the actors there dress normally enough when not acting and going about private business, so why "dress up gay"? It is clearly not necessary to get the job.

Some do and some don't. Some don't worry about things like that and some are hyper. I think this is more of an issue in certain countries and cultures where there is less social acceptance. I'm lucky to live in a place where this is for most of us a non-issue.

yall making a big deal out of it honestly if yall have any negative thoughts regarding something incredibly minor just keep it to yourselves, its like your starting a fight u could have at least said something constructive instead of something blatantly offensive

ヽ(*≧ω≦)ﾉhygge!!!!!

my point was just that is it really that weird for someone who tries attract the porn industry in order to be recruited by them dresses up in such a stereotypical "porn" getup?

of course the actual porn actors dress up normally in their free time but how is he supposed to attract the porn industry by just pretending to be a normal/an average student who just happens to be gay? how does being gay alone make you a porn actor?
dressing a 'lil bit slutty seems like a realistic choice for someone who hopes to get noticed by the porn industry and doesn't really know how but just happens to get a job near porn industry people (also how should a normal student know how to become part of the porn industry? so this also fits to the student who hopes to be recruited by the porn industry act)

besides i said "he goes undercover as someone who'd love to become a gay porn actor" not as someone who is a gay porn actor, so...

A fight with whom? You, because you don't feel this way? The rest of us are having a discussion, and even if we don't agree, none of us find the fact that we're discussing the subject "offensive". You may consider the point minor, but perhaps we don't. We at least felt it worth discussing why it was even there. I find your comment offensive, because what you're essentially telling ALL of us to do is to shut up because YOU don't think this is something that was at all important, and any discussion on the subject has no constructive merit, so is offensive to you. As if we must have YOUR permission or approval as to what subjects are worthy of debate.

If you had simply stated that you thought we were making a big deal of what you found to be a rather minor point, and left it at that, it would have been fine and a perfectly legitimate point of view.

Perhaps you're right. Though I think it still doesn't feel like they knew much about anything. Didn't they try to ID the people in the videos and find out something about who they were, their background and financial history, before going undercover? I mean at least try to find out beforehand how the company likely recruits it's actors, if you're trying to be recruited. If those other actors aren't there because they are gay, or even wanted to do gay porn, but blackmail or because they got in financial trouble, then trying to be something they don't normally seek out could make you look suspect to the company.

I sengen med yaoi og en kop kaffe= total hygge! :D

fully agree with that! while i think his outfit fits to the role he was given, this police force seems to be the most disorganized police force ever, either that or it's a total noob who made the important decision regarding this investigation (or both); i mean come on how did they not find out about the stuff that they just figured out by just looking at their porn without/before sending an undercover agent there if all they had to do was just simply take a look at that porn??? it's been bugging me the whole time how they just barged in there with an undercover investigation without having properly investigated the things that they could without sending someone undercover first... did they even start any investigation at all before the undercover investigation? imo they should've gathered much more informations (or at least tried to gather more information) before even thinking about sending someone there undercover... if it'd be just that impossible to gather information about them without sending someone there i'd understand but chapter 5 clearly shows how the police didnt even try

Te for mig! “ψ(｀∇´)ψ Ｏ(≧∇≦)Ｏ

Which should make both of us wonder. If this is fairly obvious to us, and I assume both of us are not in law enforcement in any way, just used a bit of common sense and imagination, shouldn't it be to the writer and editor? That was my problem in a nut shell. I'm not sure if the author was trying to make a point about something and just was more focused on that than the logic of the story itself.