Why Thai Girl Love shows are built different, and why it matters. Part II: Narrative

First part: Why Thai Girl Love shows are built different, and why it matters. Part I: How we got Thai sapphic cinema

Most people who watch Thai GL (including myself), if asked to list "Thai GL tropes", would probably name recurring plot points (such as redemption arcs of homophobic parental figures - which I will also talk about, but from a slightly different perspective), recurring scenes (such as bathtub scenes or mansions), and LED light garlands wrapped around every object on the set the filming crew could find and reach. 

I want to look at it from a more meta and narrative-building perspective. The point here isn't to confidently say that these things are definitely the defining reasons why Thai sapphic media is thriving, or to state that everyone who creates sapphic media should religiously recreate Thai Gls structure using this post as their Bible. 

This post is just to pinpoint the ways Thai GL structures its narrative, and discuss why these ways might work better than Western structures. I am writing this post to systematize my thoughts and, consequently, to allow myself to make more conscious choices when writing - not to "just give up on my culture and accept that Thai ways are by definition superior because they Made It". 

I do hope other people find it useful as well. 

So...

Let's begin. 

1. There is little to no forced proximity in Thai GL media

To clarify: a forced proximity trope does not refer to any and every Act of God that brings two characters together because that would be any story of any genre where characters meet for any reason whatsoever. Instead, it specifically refers to a plot where characters are forced to spend time together, in proximity, and against their will, which leads to them falling in love. Forced proximity is related to love-hate and enemies-to-lovers romance but does not equate to it. Two enemies obsessed with each other are not being forced into proximity - they actively look to fight each other. Just like forced proximity does not necessarily imply the characters forced into the same space are enemies: a writer staying in a secluded cabin in the mountains for some quiet time is not in any sort of conflict with an injured hiker she has found and has to look after while waiting for the storm to subside. But they are forced into proximity by external circumstances - neither actively looked to spend time with the other and would much rather be doing something else. 

Why is this trope used? Quoting:

Romance novel leads can face any number of obstacles on their way to happily ever after, and some can seem insurmountable given family interference, social issues/prohibitions, poor communication, etc. The forced proximity trope takes two people who should logically never fall in love because of the above reasons and removes them from their “known world.” Sometimes this means physically relocating them, and other times it simply means creating enough of a disturbance in their daily lives/routines that they are sufficiently disoriented. It’s all about the disorientation, shaking up the norm until the characters are enabled to fall in love despite everything that might otherwise separate them. The means by which the disorientation takes place, however, is entirely up to the creativity of the author. (c) article

Observation: Western (sapphic) romance adores forced proximity. Two women who do not want to work together have to work together. A hunter and avian shifter from opposing clans have to stick together to survive. A woman gets drunk and accidentally wanders onto a ship heading to an environmental protest somewhere far away in the ocean. A team of high school girls' soccer players get stuck deep in the wilderness for nineteen months...

Go to your local bookshop, find the LGBT section, and read the blurbs of sapphic novels. I can guarantee you that the vast majority would involve forced proximity. (It might be that the situation with straight romance is the same. I am just paying less attention to the straight romance novels.)

Confession: I do not find this trope romantic. It gives me anxiety. I personally cannot imagine falling in love in a situation where I have no choice but to interact with someone. It does not reflect my experience with women either - in all cases, there was undeniable mutual interest, we were not "forced together" and then "grew fond of each other". We wanted to be together. (I even thought I did not like romance for a while when in reality I did not like the forced proximity trope).

Thai GLs - at least so far - do not use this trope. Even if the characters meet in the most unfavorable circumstances, the reason why they stick together is that they like each other. They can leave. They just don't, because they like each other. They actively seek each other's company. 

There are semi-exceptions to this, which, in fact, are not truly exceptions. First, a 2024 series with Ling and Orm, The Secret of Us. Second, the upcoming series starring Becky and Freen, Cranium. However, even those two shows try hard to avoid the typical Western forced proximity trope by making the main characters former lovers who had a bad breakup and are now forced back together by external circumstances. But we are shown very clearly, in both cases, that the MCs liked each other, and still like each other. Circumstances are not breaking, but restoring the world they lost. 

Now, my personal experience and anxiety aside, why do I find Thai structure superior to the Western structure? Simple: because it is storytelling-level consent. Fandoms talk a lot about problematic tropes within the story, at an in-universe level (think: drunk sex). Less - about storytelling-level tropes that might present an even bigger issue, as they communicate a more "meta" view on how relationships form and work. Of course, in real life, there is no "author" that forces you into proximity with a terrible roommate or an insufferable colleague - such things just happen. In fiction, however, the author makes a conscious choice to not allow their character to leave a space, with a certain goal in mind. In detective media, it is to force the characters involved to investigate the mystery instead of calling the police. In horror media, it is to create a sense that "hell is other people". What about romance? The quote at the start of this section presents optimistic reasoning behind the trope. 

My less optimistic point of view is that it is (partly) to eliminate responsibility. The characters are not looking for romance (or even friendship). They are happily single and focused on their careers, goals, and more. Looking for romance is silly, bad, wrong, and why would you want to write about characters that are fundamentally silly, bad, and wrong? But because the two characters are forced together, it is not really their fault that they start liking each other. They were not doing anything wrong. They were doing and feeling everything right and were, thus, rewarded with a relationship. 

Do you see the issue? 

(Mind me, I might be a bit biased. I generally do not like reluctant MCs. 

If I open a book about pirates I hope to see an enthusiastic pirate, not a pirate who hates the sea, boats, robbing ships, maps, gold, and even their parrot). 

2. Characters' emotions are taken seriously by the narrative - even the imperfect ones

Not a recurring, but a notable scene: 

Wan from Affair, a doctor on duty, is mad about Pleng, her girlfriend, ignoring her calls. A male character, her coworker, comments on that: what is wrong with her? Psycho. She is probably on her period. Wan pays no attention to him. In fact, it isn't even clear if she hears him or not. She storms out of the changing room and the guy is left standing there. We never get back to him, because the narrative jumps to Wan and Pleng resolving their issues. 

I love this scene. 

It both acknowledges the reality of things (yes, there would be people who think you are "on your period" and whatnot) and tells us this reality does not matter. Just live your life. Not only Wan's character does not get to argue with this guy, we don't even know if she hears him. She is occupied by her own reality and problems. The guy exists, but he is as irrelevant to the story as it gets. 

We love criticizing women's perception of romance ("everything teenage girls like is cringe because they are overemotional and irrational" phenomena), love criticizing women's reactions, and ways they are showing pain ("manipulation").

Not doing it in our cultural climate is often seen as "pretending that women are perfect". 

In this climate writing an interesting, compelling female character is practically impossible because whatever the character is feeling is by definition inadequate and has to be forcibly fixed. The only way to not "fix" them is to make them perfect right away - but that is, quite expectedly, boring. Straight romance can use a male character to define "limits" for the female character's emotions and feelings, but in sapphic romance, the only thing that can define it is the narrative (because the actual characters cannot be trusted!). And the narrative often is way too eager to do it. 

As I said, this scene is a notable exception. Affair generally flirts with the in-universe "criticism of emotions" a lot (it also has characters that are doing Everything Wrong in this domain, to the point I might want to consider it a social experiment of boundry-pushing that is pretending to be a silly romance), and in every case, it is not supported by the narrative. 

Other Thai GLs mostly achieve their narrative goal of "seriosifying" women's feelings simply by not actively punishing their characters for them (it does not mean characters do not face consequences for their actions - they just face them for actual wrongdoings) and providing them with a solid support system - which seems simple enough, but I do struggle with this in my own writing (funnily enough, not when I am writing fanfiction about Thai female characters. They really leave no room for this)! We are all victims of culture, aren't we? 

3. Intimacy is about characters reacting to each other

When it comes to sex, the focus is on emotions and reactions, not physicality. Please do not be mistaken: Thai Gls (and BLs) are straight-up erotica. Characters have a lot of sex. Characters openly talk about sex with their friends. Characters have sex in bathtubs, outside of bathtubs, in cars, in bed, in showers, in pools, in living rooms of their mansions, and all the other interesting places. Have you seen French straight media (not all would classify as romance due to depressing endings, but in terms of positive portrayal of straight sensuality and sexuality it is unmatched. Unfortunately, the French continue to fail to do the same with same-sex sensuality)? It's that, but make it sapphic. 

The trick? It's not about bodies. What we are really looking at is their faces, their eyes, their smiles, their hands. In other words, what we are really looking at is their pleasure, emotions, trust, and their desire for each other. 

4. Redemption arcs (they might not be as bad as you think)

Thai GLs are notorious for redeeming abusive homophobic parental figures just before the two main characters get their happily ever after, or straight after they get their happily ever after - this is a recurring trope. Many people see it as a call to forgive and forget mistreatment, and, understandably, do not feel very thrilled by this call. I truly do understand this way of looking at the trope, but, in my opinion, there is a broader theme involved than Thais believing you must forgive your parent. 

Thai GLs generally love redemption arcs. 

(Which is, I believe, somewhat loosely interlinked with Thais liking revenge plots - with demons, ghosts, humans, and just anyone willing to participate - no discrimination on the basis of one's status of deadliness. This was a side note. Back to redemption arcs!)

Love Bully, for example, had a classic redemption arc for the parental figure of one of the leads - but also provided what I interpret as transophobe-coded MCs with one. Her sweet and loving parental figure, a trans woman, was "the reason she got bullied", which led to her resenting both the parent and her own queerness. However, when the second MC showed nothing but acceptance both of the first MC and her parent, she went through a "redemption arc" and overcame her hard feelings. (Despite the fact Love Bully is hardly an example of good writing, this plotline stuck with me due to a very different approach to "a taboo subject" of transophobia in LGBT community). 

In Affair, a male "competitor" (I am avoiding heavy spoilers) gets his redemption arc after he realizes how much of his actions stemmed from trying to please his parents. 

In Pluto pretty much all characters get a redemption arc. 

My point is that redemption arcs in Thai GL are not offered only to the parental figures because everyone must Respect Their Authority. They are given out left and right. Another important thing to mention - characters typically realize they were wrong both due to bad and good things happening to them - not just because they get "punished" (by another character or by the "universe", i.e. narrative), but because of a complex journey. 

And I will say something melodramatic, but Thai GL industry began because two people went through their own real-life versions of redemption arcs. Chao Planoy got her work adapted into worldwide-known TV shows at the expense of those works losing some of their problematic aspects and being remastered for the better - we do not really know her role in the show production, she might have had no role at all, but I like to think she is involved in screenwriting to some degree and is happy with the changes. And Saint, the person who made and sponsored GAP and proved sapphic shows can thrive, went through his redemption arc when he accepted that his first GAP trailer was male gaze and tweaked things around. 

With that in mind, I can definitely see why redemption arcs are popular in Thai GLs.

My final point is that redemption arcs are not per se signals to forgive and forget abusers - but instead signals of the possibility of change: social, cultural, and personal. 

...Which, in my opinion, is something very intrinsically, fundamentally linked to queerness.