“I Can See Myself in Them, but They Are Not Me”: Asian Boys’ Love (BL) Drama and Gay Male Viewers
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study has great historical value due to the context in which it is carried out: Malaysia. This is because homosexuality is persecuted. This is, in my opinion, the great merit of this research, and not so much its theoretical contribution (which it also has). This study should be a landmark in Malaysian research on the homosexual population. The objective is well defined, as well as the theoretical framework. There is a good review of similar studies. The qualitative methodology is appropriate for a study of these characteristics, and possibly the only possible one in a context of persecution of homosexuals (it seems impossible to carry out a quantitative study, with representative samples). Did the research team have any initial hypotheses? As a possible improvement, just one observation regarding the sample: I request that you indicate (safeguarding the identity of the participants) how it was selected, how it was contacted, if there are inclusion and exclusion criteria. In qualitative studies, the sample is intended to be as plural as possible to collect the greatest plurality of opinions and new categories. Was this taken into account? The sample appears to be very homogeneous, at least by age. Can any other data of the sample be given globally (not for each case, table 1)? For example, educational level, if they live in rural or urban areas. Lastly, there is no information on who conducted the interviews. Was it someone from the research team? Did you know the objectives of the study? Did you know the study participants? The limitations of the study are well defined.El estudio tiene un gran valor histórico por el contexto en el que se realiza: Malaysia. Esto es debido por que la homosexualidad está perseguida. Este es, en mi opinión, el gran mérito de esta investigación, y no tanto su aportación teórica (que también la tiene). Este estudio debería ser una referencia histórica en la investigación de Malaysia sobre población homosexual.
El objetivo está bien definido, así como el marco teórico. Hay una buena revisión de estudios similares. La metodología cualitativa es la adecuada para un estudio de estas características, y posiblemente la única posible en un contexto de persecución de las personas homosexuales (parece imposible realizar un estudio cuantitativo, con muestras representativas).
¿Tenía el equipo investigador alguna hipótesis de partida?
Como posible mejora, solo una observación en cuanto a la muestra: solicito que se indique (salvaguardando la identidad de los participantes) cómo se seleccionó la misma, cómo se contactó, si hay criterios de inclusión y de exclusión.
En los estudios cualitativos se intenta que la muestra sea lo más plural posible para recoger la mayor pluralidad de opiniones y de nuevas categorías ¿se tuvo esto en cuenta? La muestra parece ser muy homogénea, por lo menos por la edad. ¿Se puede dar un algún otro dato más de la muestra de forma global (no para cada caso, tabla 1)? Por ejemplo, nivel de estudios, si viven en zonas rurales o urbanas.
Por último, falta información de quien realizó las entrevistas ¿fue alguien del equipo investigador? ¿conocía los objetivos del estudio? ¿conocía a los participantes del estudio?
Están bien definidas las limitaciones del estudio.
Author Response
Reviewer 1
The study has great historical value due to the context in which it is carried out: Malaysia. This is because homosexuality is persecuted. This is, in my opinion, the great merit of this research, and not so much its theoretical contribution (which it also has). This study should be a landmark in Malaysian research on the homosexual population. The objective is well defined, as well as the theoretical framework. There is a good review of similar studies. The qualitative methodology is appropriate for a study of these characteristics, and possibly the only possible one in a context of persecution of homosexuals (it seems impossible to carry out a quantitative study, with representative samples).
Did the research team have any initial hypotheses?
Author response: Thank you for the question. Yes, we did have an initial hypothesis that was based on previous studies examining BL drama consumption among LGBT viewers/audiences. Accordingly, we have included it in the introduction section. Kindly see lines 41-50, pages 1-2.
As a possible improvement, just one observation regarding the sample: I request that you indicate (safeguarding the identity of the participants) how it was selected, how it was contacted, if there are inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Author response: Thank you for pointing this out. We have included the explanation of the selection method and the inclusion and exclusion criteria in the methodology section. Kindly see lines 290-302, pages 6-7.
In qualitative studies, the sample is intended to be as plural as possible to collect the greatest plurality of opinions and new categories. Was this taken into account? The sample appears to be very homogeneous, at least by age. Can any other data of the sample be given globally (not for each case, table 1)? For example, educational level, if they live in rural or urban areas.
Author response: Thank you for pointing this out. We intended to make the sample as plural as we could to gather the diversity of opinions by recruiting more than 15 participants from different backgrounds (educational level, rural-urban residence). Kindly see lines 290-302, pages 6-7. Unfortunately, those who agreed appeared to be from similar backgrounds (age group, education, employment) hence the homogeneity that the reviewer correctly mentioned.
Lastly, there is no information on who conducted the interviews. Was it someone from the research team? Did you know the objectives of the study? Did you know the study participants?
Author response: Thank you for pointing this out. Accordingly, we have included the information about the interviewers in the methodology section. Kindly see lines 322-323, page 7.
The limitations of the study are well defined.
Author response: Thank you!
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is interesting and built in an adecuate framework. Qualitative methology is, in general, well-described. However, it will benefit from some revisions.
In a qualitative study, the introduction should end with a clear articulated research question/s that guided the study.
Method
Authors should explain how participants were approached and how they established that participants in the interview were representative? How many people did not want to participate in the interview?
Given that the interview was semi-structured, please clarify what other questions were elucidated during the interviews.
Please, specify if the participants obtained any kind of compensation to participate in the study.
In relation to the interviews, did the data collection ended when participants did not longer reveal new patterns, themes or other findings?
Data analyses require a more detailed description to allow readers to follow each step of the analysis. For example, did the authors used triangulation of data in the categorization procedure? Please, explain how triangulation was assured in each phase described. For example, how coded the themes? Did various researchers coded the data form the interview and agreement was discussed before? It should also be explained that data triangulation could means using data from different participants or in different settings or at different times. Please, clarify.
Finally, what is the take-home message of this paper? Here, some conclusive remarks may be specified by the authors for the general readership.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
The paper is interesting and built in an adecuate framework. Qualitative methology is, in general, well-described. However, it will benefit from some revisions.
Author response: Thank you for the comments. We really appreciate it!
In a qualitative study, the introduction should end with a clear articulated research question/s that guided the study.
Author response: Thank you for the suggestion. We agree with the reviewer and we have included the questions in the introduction section. Kindly see lines 41-50, pages 1-2.
Method
Authors should explain how participants were approached and how they established that participants in the interview were representative? How many people did not want to participate in the interview?
Author response: Thank you for the questions. We agree with the reviewer and we have provided the details in the methodology section. Kindly see lines 290-302, pages 6-7.
Given that the interview was semi-structured, please clarify what other questions were elucidated during the interviews.
Author response: Thank you for pointing this out. There were a number of other questions that we asked during the interviews which were mainly probing questions including the clarification, example, and evaluation types. We have included some of these questions in the methodology section. Kindly see lines 327-331, page 7.
Please, specify if the participants obtained any kind of compensation to participate in the study.
In relation to the interviews, did the data collection ended when participants did not longer reveal new patterns, themes or other findings?
Author response: Thank you for the question. We ended the data collection when the participants no longer reveal new patterns, themes, or other findings. We did this by keeping in mind our research aim and its specific objectives, as well as the research hypothesis. Kindly see lines 331-332, page 7.
Data analyses require a more detailed description to allow readers to follow each step of the analysis. For example, did the authors used triangulation of data in the categorization procedure? Please, explain how triangulation was assured in each phase described. For example, how coded the themes? Did various researchers coded the data form the interview and agreement was discussed before? It should also be explained that data triangulation could means using data from different participants or in different settings or at different times. Please, clarify.
Author response: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with the reviewer’s assessment. Accordingly, have provided the description for the triangulation in the methodology section. Kindly see lines 343-351 and lines 355-360, page 8.
Finally, what is the take-home message of this paper? Here, some conclusive remarks may be specified by the authors for the general readership.
Author response: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with the reviewer and we have included the take-home message in the conclusion section. Kindly see lines 573-578, page 12.
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper addresses a significant issue as the growth of the phenomenon of Boys’Love (BL) drama among the homosexual community in Malaysia. This research covers part of the lack of studies in this area in general, where most of studies were focused on the heterosexual women viewers. It is a study that sheds some light with empirical data about the construction of homosexual identity in a country where homosexuality is forbidden, and the role of BL drama. The article is well-structured. But, I miss some mentions to the literature about the construction of homosexual identity in Muslim countries, due to the singularity of Malaysia. One of the biggest problems of being homosexual in a Muslim country is the social and legal rejections. So, in this framework how can BL drama be a little window?
I didn’t find the reference Kamm (2013) in the section “References”, although the paper mentioned several times.
Author Response
Reviewer 3
This paper addresses a significant issue as the growth of the phenomenon of Boys’Love (BL) drama among the homosexual community in Malaysia. This research covers part of the lack of studies in this area in general, where most of studies were focused on the heterosexual women viewers. It is a study that sheds some light with empirical data about the construction of homosexual identity in a country where homosexuality is forbidden, and the role of BL drama. The article is well-structured.
Author response: Thank you for the comments. We really appreciate it!
But, I miss some mentions to the literature about the construction of homosexual identity in Muslim countries, due to the singularity of Malaysia. One of the biggest problems of being homosexual in a Muslim country is the social and legal rejections. So, in this framework how can BL drama be a little window?
Author response: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with the reviewer’s assessment. Accordingly, we have included some information about the construction of homosexual identity in Muslim countries in the literature review section. Kindly see lines 134-187, pages 3-4, and lines 573-578, page 12.
I didn’t find the reference Kamm (2013) in the section “References”, although the paper mentioned several times.
Author response: Thank you for pointing this out. As suggested by the reviewer, we have included the reference in the “References” section. We regret the error made and we offer our apologies. Kindly see lines 616-618, page 13.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors addressed my previous concerns. I have not further comments.
