‘Stop pretending we don’t exist’: Seoul fills its streets with Pride colour ⁠60%

By Raphael Rashid⁠0%

6/12/2026, 11:54:51 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 24 faulty reasoning types, including Status Quo Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Anecdotal, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 33.2% saturation with 112 hits. Analysis detected 791 faulty-reasoning hits from 337 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 55.6% and a BS Rank of ⁠60% (8,948 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 59.10% of the article peer group.

Tens of thousands of people have poured into central Seoul to celebrate the city’s annual queer culture festival, filling the streets with rainbow flags and drumming troupes in one of Asia’s largest Pride gatherings. 
“I only tell friends who I think can accept it,” said Lee Seo-hee, a university student from Seoul who identifies as bisexual. 
“It doesn’t feel like a completely safe society.” 
But little could dampen the mood on Saturday, despite LGBTQ+ people in South Korea remaining without basic legal protections, and a comprehensive anti-discrimination law blocked in parliament for nearly two decades. 
On a blazing sunny day, the mood was jubilant and unguarded. 
Booths lined the festival grounds in another location instead, representing civil society groups, university clubs and diplomatic missions including the British embassy. 
“This is the one time of year people feel they can truly show who they are,” said Jay Park, a film-maker and frequent attender. 
“Until a few years ago, many came covering themselves up, afraid of being seen.” 
Days earlier a Seoul court had offered a rare step forward, ruling that a same-sex couple who had shared their lives and finances constituted a protected legal union, even as same-sex marriage is not legally recognised in South Korea. 
Last month the government quietly committed to laying the groundwork for such a law, listing it among national policy tasks of President Lee Jae Myung’s administration. 
“Even Korean companies that sponsor Pride abroad keep their mouths shut about LGBTQ+ rights in Korea,” said Heezy Yang, a Seoul-based queer artist and activist. 
South Korean pop culture exported queerness to the world through films, music videos and dramas, he said, while the country silenced it at home. 
Nearby, a crowd of counter-protesters held a rival rally, with trucks blasting hymns and banners declaring homosexuality a sin. 
“Korean politicians have always treated minority issues as an afterthought, people not worth their votes,” Park said. 
“Stop pretending we don’t exist. 
Pass the anti-discrimination law.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.2%Raphael Rashid: 1.2%the Guardian: 3.7%Confirmation Bias4.2%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 1.2%the Guardian: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 10.1%Raphael Rashid: 2.8%the Guardian: 3.1%Availability Heuristic10.1%This article: 10.7%Raphael Rashid: 1.5%the Guardian: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic10.7%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 1.3%the Guardian: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.9%the Guardian: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 12.8%Raphael Rashid: 5.4%the Guardian: 6.1%Framing Effect12.8%This article: 1.2%Raphael Rashid: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.6%Loss Aversion1.2%This article: 20.8%Raphael Rashid: 1.9%the Guardian: 0.6%Status Quo Bias20.8%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.0%Raphael Rashid: 3.2%the Guardian: 2.5%Optimism Bias11.0%This article: 2.4%Raphael Rashid: 0.9%the Guardian: 2.1%Pessimism Bias2.4%This article: 33.2%Raphael Rashid: 4.3%the Guardian: 10.4%Negativity Bias33.2%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 3.8%the Guardian: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Raphael Rashid: 0.6%the Guardian: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error6.5%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 8.6%Raphael Rashid: 2.0%the Guardian: 1.3%In-Group Bias8.6%This article: 7.4%Raphael Rashid: 1.0%the Guardian: 0.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias7.4%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.6%the Guardian: 3.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 1.8%the Guardian: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 8.6%Raphael Rashid: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.4%Primacy Effect8.6%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.3%the Guardian: 2.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 6.9%the Guardian: 3.8%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 16.3%Raphael Rashid: 1.7%the Guardian: 1.7%False Dilemma16.3%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 19.6%Raphael Rashid: 8.0%the Guardian: 6.3%Hasty Generalization19.6%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.6%the Guardian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.7%the Guardian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 15.1%Raphael Rashid: 3.4%the Guardian: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion15.1%This article: 1.5%Raphael Rashid: 0.8%the Guardian: 0.9%Begging the Question1.5%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 7.1%the Guardian: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 1.2%Raphael Rashid: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.4%Burden of Proof1.2%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.7%the Guardian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 16.6%Raphael Rashid: 4.3%the Guardian: 3.1%Anecdotal16.6%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.5%the Guardian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.1%Raphael Rashid: 2.0%the Guardian: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.1%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.5%Raphael Rashid: 2.8%the Guardian: 1.6%Unattributed Quote6.5%This article: 3.6%Raphael Rashid: 1.7%the Guardian: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection3.6%This article: 3.6%Raphael Rashid: 1.9%the Guardian: 10.4%Biased Writer Voice3.6%This article: 6.2%Raphael Rashid: 0.5%the Guardian: 1.8%Indoctrination6.2%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 1.3%the Guardian: 3.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Raphael Rashid: 0.0%the Guardian: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

337 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers42%attributed speech194writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageLee Seo-hee • 22 words • 100.0% coverageLee Seo-hee • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageJay Park • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJay Park • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageHeezy Yang • 25 words • 0.0% coverageHeezy Yang • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coveragePark • 17 words • 0.0% coveragePark • 5 words • 100.0% coveragePark • 4 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Park

100%flagged-word coverage
26 attributed words18% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Indoctrination+28.4 ptsWriter: 6.2%Park: 34.6%34.6%Quote-first Misdirection-6.2 ptsWriter: 6.2%Park: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-6.2 ptsWriter: 6.2%Park: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.