Dr Patrick S. Thomsen’s research about the evolution of the sexual identity of Korean men in America was incredibly revelationary. Thomsen’s work was spring boarded by identifying the intrinsic flaws in the Cass Homosexual Identity Model, commonly relied upon in the academic world. Thomsen discovered that its prescriptive, linear nature was inappropriate: it ignored pressing issues of cultural adaptive behaviour and social relations. What alarmed me the most about Cass’s model was that its claim to predictability overlooked any semblance of individuality and experience. This ‘Great Work’ combated understanding and doing justice to the experience of gay Korean men by providing a shield for Orientalism. To overcome this, Thomsen adopted a Samoan framework that stressed concepts of relationality, and in doing so, necessitated the exploration of Korean culture and history. Doing so, Thomsen focused on getting to know the research participants first, humanising them in a way which brought more valuable insight and accurate representaiton. Thomsen’s revelations and the level of detail he was able to extract from participants should be a reminder that complacency in a field of research, and looking it through a lens that best services preconceptions, is something that needs to be avoided, if we, as researchers, are to overcome the inherent prejudices and misconceptions that plague society and threaten to leak into the research process.
