“When Societal Burdens Lay Heavy On You”: The Analysis of Themes In The Boy and I Who Will Break Up in 100 Days Episode 4
[a] What Exactly Does the Documentary Represent?
[1] For Yuma
Only after halfway of the series, I finally understood that for Yuma, this documentary is about getting back together with Itsuki. That’s why he asked about getting back together in the last scene of the second episode. That’s why he shouted “make the commitment, then” to Itsuki. All of these represent so much that Yuma sees this documentary as a way for the two of them to go back together, be it because the show makes the two play “house” as a lovey-dovey couple, and somehow in Yuma’s head, this will make Itsuki realize that he loves Yuma. OR, by way of the second method, the one that Yuma said out loud in this episode, that the documentary contractually binds the two together, something very unethical, asshole-ish, horrible for Yuma to have planned against Itsuki. Maybe that’s why Itsuki did his revenge “cheating”
First of all, this is the first time that I’ve ever seen a(n), implied, sex cheating scene in a BL, or whatever category this series falls under. My heart is still beating quite fast seeing Itsuki “cheated” on Yuma. Well, it’s not cheating. Both Yuma and Itsuki have broken up even before the documentary shootings started.
However, I still hate Itsuki so much. Maybe it’s because I hate infidelity so much (I know that this shouldn't be applied here). Maybe it’s because Itsuki is being a bad house guest by having sex in the bed of his ex. However, I still really want to know, now with the full knowledge of what the documentary means for Yuma, what did Yuma exactly say to Itsuki that made him to reluctantly agree to be in the documentary in the first place.
I have to applaud Itsuki for the deviousness of his sex revenge plan though. He basically cuckolded Yuma in his bed with the young uni student of the Gay Straight Alliance, or whatever the name of the queer rights organization is, the same people whom Yuma championed, sacrificed his privacy and private life for. The same group of students that Yuma encouraged Itsuki to mingle with. That is just utter brilliance. I’m still very stunned with just how brilliant and despicable this plan is.
However, I stand by my characterization, so far, that Yuma still sees that this documentary is a way for him to contribute to the gay rights movement. He has a sneaky plan behind all of the facade of fighting for the gay cause, but that belief about the queer liberation movement is still genuinely there. If you ask me which one of the causes is bigger for him? I don’t know, I genuinely think that the cause of getting Itsuki is not that bigger than the gay rights movement cause considering that Yuma still asked about the documentary even after seeing his ex in his bed post-sex with another guy.
[2] For Shiho
After watching the scene between Shiho and Naomi two times, I finally understand what this documentary means for her, that she wanted to show the public the ability of women directors in documenting the lives of marginalized community. I am very happy to be correct in noticing that the director were purposefully, or forgetfully, neglecting Itsuki’s very uncooperative behaviors for the documentary. All of these is just to show the public that she can do things by the books, that women directors can make naturalistic documentaries just like men. Even though I don’t agree with the conclusion that Naomi and Shiho had by the end of their conversation about society has nothing to do with Shiho’s lap of judgement, I’m happy to finally understand what exactly Shiho is looking for by making the documentary.
[b] What Are You to The Market?
This is also not a new debate. I’m very happy to be correct in identifying that Yuma is being treated as the gay token employee by the cosmetic industry who chose his ad campaign. This debate of whether affirmative actions help or diminish marginalized communities, whether marginalized communities are assessed based on their merits or not, all of these discussions are really the debate of fighting for crumbs of the patriarchal-capitalist society's spoils. Setting aside the fact that the “real” DEI hires have always been the cis white able-bodied men who happen to be the friends/families of the CEO, setting aside the fact that DEI hires of any marginalized community always go through rigorous process of merit-based before being hired, I think this theme also represents of what are you to the market? I remember when I was practicing with my varsity debate team and was told about how Malcolm X preferred to be identified as a black activist first instead of being a moslem American activist, or the endless analysis of Hillary Clinton presidential campaigns, about how she presented herself as “just good as any other men” in the 2008 election, and in the 2016 election, she then tried to bring her identity as a woman something that can help her as a president. It’s quite revealing when Yuma practically had enough with the cosmetic industry VP or some exec testament when she reduced to Yuma’s identity as the “gay one.”
After the group saw Itsuki in bed with another guy, and the uni student went home, Itsuki had this long monologue about how the documentary demeaned him and reduced him to something that people get off from, guessing who is the top who’s the bottom (episode two call back).
If you were to ask me, whether it’s helpful or not for society to simply reduce me as the gay agnostic democratic socialist one, I would ask questions, does it make me closer to the means of production or not? Does it bring me closer to have the means to empower other queer organizations? Does it bring me to the “financial independence” so that I can freely advocate for my causes?
[c] Male Solidarity, at the expense of cis women
This show is probably the best intersectional BL series I’ve ever seen. The fact that they made the scene about the old guy CEO going over the director’s head and work directly with the assistant director, as tho the director doesn’t exist is pretty jarring, man. This kind of shit is something that many cis women managers have to endure everyday, that they are overlooked in favor of their men subordinate. Gosh, this episode really made me quite immobile.
What’s to come?
I think in the next episode, they’re trying to portray Itsuki as this person who does all of these charities and help the community, despite his detachment to the queer liberation movement. These actions are virtuous, I agree, however, you simply cannot change the mindset of a nation alone. You simply cannot fight queerphobia by not helping and working with the queer rights organizations. Yes, I know that Itsuki is more than a gay man, however one of his identities is still a gay man and he simply cannot leave gay persecutions by being virtuous alone.
I’m so in love with this series. I’m still so shocked by the cuckolding scene. This show really can make you feel uncomfortable and challenged. I’ve never felt this alive in the past year or so.
