What's in the Media: #IU #ZeZé

Spreading like wildfire in Korea and internationally is IU's backlash for her song Zezé, plagiarism, and lolita concept. Once loved by all of Korea, IU is probably one of the most disliked now. I didn't even know what the Lolita was actually. I was curious to find out more about it and managed to check out the film Lolita yesterday night in my spare time. Lolita = pedophile based on that film. I actually really enjoyed the film Lolita but was quite disturbed that Humbert was infatuated/ later obsessed with Lo. The film portrayed his love for her as quite innocent in the beginning, but that slowly took a turn to become more than that after the death of Lo's mother. Humbert did not fall in love with Lo but with her innocence as a child.

 Koreans are hating IU for her Lolita concept and for sexualizing a 5-year-old. Ironically, most k-pop female idols are dressed in high school uniforms and praised for the aegyo (childlike behaviors which involves acting cute and innocent). 

Whether or not IU will be affected by these scandals in the future, nobody knows. Only time will tell. Right now, however, she is being hated on like T-ara. 

P.S. I have not yet read My Sweet Orange Tree. But I know that it is a beloved book. I believe that IU should be criticized for sexualizing Zezé. Note these are only my own thoughts. 

Sugar Babydoll (YouTube commenter of Lolita film) writes: 
Since I uploaded this movie, I saw many comments with an opinion based only on the movie (if you have not read the book yet buy it because the movie is just a short piece of the story) so I decided to explain my point of view about it anyway. First of all, Lolita did not loved Humbert. Yeah, she had a crush on him when she saw him for the first time, but it was something very innocent. Not necessarily because she did not know what she was doing (she did know) but because she did not know things would turn that way (and she started to like him only because she did not know who he actually was). Second, Humbert is a pedophile. In the book he describes nymphets girls of nine-fourteen and girls at age nine are children, no matter what they do. Third, no. Dolores was not a "lucky girl". She was a victim. She was a girl who had nowhere else to go, like Hum said. She was raped. She was not able to hang out with boys of her age (because her 'stepfather was jealous'); she was bribed to get what she wanted, included her civil rights, what every child/teen should do. And H.H. took the money back EVERY time (because he was afraid she could ran away from him). He saw her as an object made only for his personal pleasures. So if you think Lo was a "lucky girl" you have issues. Fourth, in my opinion (that is, my point of view, you can think in a different way) Hum did loved her, but he just discovered it when she was no longer the object of his obsession. Fifth, I don't clarify Hum as a monster but as a sick man (yes, pedophilia is a disease!) who should have gotten help. He could have loved Lo, I get it, but love is no excuse for what he did. Sixth, Lo was not just a victim, but a BRAVE girl. While she was being raped, with no parents to help her, having to travel with a sick stepfather who was not technically a stepfather (I mean, a normal stepfather do not have sex with their stepchild), she tried to be happy. After all the shit she went through, she tried. But she didn't. She could not be happy after what happened. Seventh, 'Lolita' is not a love story. Love stories are those which both characters love each other, such as "Bonnie and Clyde" for example. 'Lolita' is exactly the opposite. I understand Lo. I understand what she went through. I was sexually abused by my stepfather when I was eight until ten (and my mother never, ever, believed me). So do not say Lo was ungrateful because rape victims are not ungrateful people. They are victims. Thank you.