I actually like these two better than him with Su ah! Taeja is cute and with principles (...

Principles? Did your brain skipped the whole ass thought monologs of the perv man? His intentions are literally clear right from the start idk how people just skipped that part or y'all reading with your eyes while y'all brains are off. What that man did was literally just the bare minimum. If Juhyeok didn't happened to put a fight we all know where everything is going to go. The bar sure is in hell my gosh.

Well I won’t argue, (these type of comic world wise - which we all obviously continue to read) he is already plenty better I would say, as it clearly indicates he must have had a violent phase of life, despite crude lifestyle he’s got the decency to stop (IT IS BARE MINIMUM BUT…). He did want to get to bed with him which can be put as ‘preference’ and he tried to- that is all I see, they are strangers basically!
On the other hand given the bond juhyeok and suah shared from childhood, Su ah’s actions in the name of protection is equivalent to betrayal - buy we continue to read it knowing they are the end game. Now tell what’s more tolerant!?

Oops I clearly argued sorry!

It’s actually interesting how you managed to correctly guess Taegae’s background and personality, but completely flattened Su Ah’s characterization at the same time. Taegae being someone who likely had a violent or rough lifestyle but still has social boundaries is a fair interpretation—but that same level of psychological reading should be applied to Su Ah too. Su Ah is consistently portrayed as intellectually and emotionally underdeveloped, not in a derogatory way, but in how he perceive things and processes relationships. He thinks in very childlike emotional logic where love = protection = staying together = doing anything to keep that person safe. He's literally portrayed as timid, socially inexperienced, emotionally dependent, and operates mostly on instinctive affection rather than mature relational reasoning.

His protection actions are not justified—but they are driven by his perception of his role as an alpha, which is also an important part of the narrative. That's how HE—not me, not you, not all the readers of this work—personally understands his alpha identity. Because he was suddenly given an alpha status when he expected to be an omega, he likely never had proper guidance on how to navigate that identity. So he built his own logic, alpha = protector of the person I cherish, that's why his actions became obsessive rather than rational.

And Juhyeok’s flaws also directly contributed to this situation. Bro is pride-driven, refuses to accept his omega biology, equates omega identity with weakness, and repeatedly puts himself in alpha-dominated environments like the judo club knowing his biology makes him vulnerable to pheromone exposure. He is not wrong for wanting to prove himself—but his stubborn denial of biological reality is part of what escalated this dependency dynamic.

Now let me ask the same question. Which is more tolerable to you? Your childhood friend crossing boundaries because that is literally the only protection language he knows, because he is emotionally immature and socially inexperienced, and protection-driven just so he could help you to keep doing what you're passionate at while you keep putting yourself in dangerous environment just because you hate embodying your biology—OR being stalked, sexually pursued, and pressured into sex using your drunken and vulnerable state by a creepy older stranger you just met? Because honestly, Taegae being “polite” doesn’t erase that he was still trying to sleep with a drunk emotionally vulnerable person he barely knows. That’s still predatory behavior, even if he stopped when rejected

Both characters are flawed. But only analyzing one side while romanticizing the other is just selective reading.

Okay, so…I will give you credit for taking time to speak out your perspective, BUT…how about this…let’s treat all 3 as “adults”, we are all who we are as result of aggregate of exposure, event, bla bla…Taejae’s predator tendencies are not overlooked but actually magnified! HE WHO COULD EASILY GET AWAY with pulling bad things chooses to stay in order when it matters, and Su Ah - regardless of however he conceived the idea of his second gender should atleast have known what’s the basic respect, especially to the one he considers most special! He need not empathise with Juheok about his life changes (they both were going through similar pains at same stages in life), but that doesn’t excuse him of treating Juheok as an object of his ideas as to how an omega could survive in society! Forget about rational behaviours he was fully aware of his strategic moves towards their dynamics.

Juheok as an adult, even advantageous as a judo pro, had the say to not to associate with Taejae, despite that he went with him because he felt safe on certain level.
And with Su ah he couldn’t shake off the relationship because of the weight they carry along and everything involving him is bound to affect him at bigger graphics, not to mention he is already fighting his way in society to achieve things he loves DESPITE the social and biological limitations. One need not support, but atleast not re-emphasise the hardships that he is very much aware of or will eventually learn to deal with those himself.

So can we not analyse Su Ah’s psychological situations hitherto, thereby subtly justifying or normalising his actions or attitude!

We are all flawed but hurting somebody even when we know they are gonna be hurt is not just flaw, it’s a sin. And to hurt somebody in the name love is arrogance and is mostly borne out of the privilege - a conceited way of estimating one’s strength over others.

In omegaverse, the status an omega is not far different from that of women in our world. There is just this pheromones effect to make it more dramatic and pitiful but major aspects remain similar, so when you actually look at it as a women who is trying to set her footing despite all odds and hardships, the perspective becomes clearer.

Now think about it, taegae or Su Ah they both can lose control as an alpha, having the upper hand with strength propositions. Who do you think you would entertain in your circle with trust? - obviously Su Ah because you have known him all your life. And whose lose in control is going to sweep you off the feet and leave you drained emotionally, mentally, physically? - Su Ah! Because there was no scepticism, just some resistance due to their sudden change in dynamics after the gender reveal.

So when I romanticised Taejae it wasn’t just because of him per se, but on a comparative scale he appears much better.

Okay, I see what you’re trying to do by comparing them on a “comparative moral scale,” but you’re still flattening the author’s actual character design intent. You can’t compare Taegae and Su Ah as if they are operating from the same psychological baseline, because the author literally did NOT write them that way. You’re comparing a character who is intentionally portrayed as socially and cognitively underdeveloped to a character who is clearly written as rational, socially aware, and capable of strategic decision-making. That is not a fair comparative analysis.

Taegae is portrayed as a fully cognitively and socially functioning adult with rational awareness of social boundaries. That’s exactly why his behavior is more disturbing in context — because he has the capacity to understand risk, consent dynamics, and social power imbalance. He deliberately approached Juhyeok, went to his university, initiated contact, invited him to drink while he was emotionally vulnerable, and then tested sexual compatibility. That is not accidental flirting energy. That is calculated predatory-coded behavior with polite social packaging.

Su Ah, on the other hand, is consistently portrayed by the author as emotionally and intellectually immature in relational cognition. Not stupid — but developmentally limited in how he processes love, protection, and attachment. He doesn’t operate with strategic manipulation logic. He operates with protection instinct logic. His mindset is basically: love = keep safe = keep close = prevent danger = ignore consent because protection is priority. That is still wrong, but it is not the same psychological profile as Taegae’s calculated approach.

So you’re comparing one character with clear social awareness and rational agency who still chose to test sexual boundaries with a vulnerable person VS one character written as socially timid, emotionally dependent, instinctively protective, and developmentally stunted in relational logic. Those are not the same psychological categories. Su Ah is not written as someone who understands social negotiation power. Taegae is. That is the difference. One is emotionally obsessive but socially clumsy. The other is socially strategic but sexually opportunistic. So romanticizing Taegae purely because he appears “more rational” ignores narrative intent. And villainizing Su Ah as if he is a calculating adult manipulator also ignores how the author intentionally framed him as emotionally underdeveloped, not morally strategic.

Also, about the “omega = women in real world” analogy — that is where omegaverse analysis gets tricky. The genre is not a 1:1 social realism allegory. It uses biological fantasy to explore dependency, consent under biological pressure, and emotional hierarchy conflicts. Some omegas are written as vulnerable social analogues, yes—but not all. This story specifically leans into psychological dependency and childhood attachment trauma rather than gender oppression allegory. So no, this isn’t about romanticizing one alpha over the other, it's about recognizing that the author intentionally wrote two very different types of psychological danger, one is obsessive emotional attachment protection logic, while the other is socially aware but sexually predatory-coded pursuit behavior. Comparative morality only works if the characters are starting from equal psychological agency.

Okay, I hear you, but I think you’re still accidentally doing the thing I was originally pushing back against— which is analyzing the characters through real-world adult moral frameworks instead of how the author literally designed them to function narratively. Because the story is not portraying Su Ah as a strategic, fully rational adult alpha navigating society with calculated intent. The author is very clearly portraying him as emotionally and cognitively underdeveloped in relational perception. That’s not me excusing his actions—that’s literally just reading the character design the way it was written.

The story does not frame Su Ah as a fully matured, socially calibrated adult operating with stable emotional intelligence. The author portrays him as developmentally stunted in how he processes attachment. That’s not me infantilizing him— that’s literally how he’s written. Timid, emotionally dependent, socially inexperienced, operating on instinctive affection rather than layered relational reasoning. If we ignore that framing and just go “well he’s an adult so he should know better,” we’re basically stripping away the psychological design the author built into him. You say he was “fully aware of his strategic moves,” but where is that hyper-calculated mastermind energy actually shown? His actions come off obsessive and misguided, yes—but they’re rooted in his warped protector logic, not some arrogant power flex. That’s the nuance. The author doesn’t paint him as someone thinking, “I will dominate because I can.” It’s more “If I don’t protect him, he’ll get in danger.” Twisted? Absolutely. Maliciously strategic? Not really.

And the Taejae praise still confuses me. “He could easily get away with bad things but chooses to stay in order", that doesn’t elevate him morally, that’s just restraint. He targeted a vulnerable college student, tested sexual boundaries, and only stopped when rejection became undeniable. That’s not virtue—that’s self-control at the last second.

Also, Juhyeok feeling “safe” enough to go with Taejae doesn’t magically erase the power imbalance. Adults can make risky decisions while vulnerable. That doesn’t absolve the person initiating the risk.

No one is normalizing Su Ah’s actions. Explaining narrative psychology is not the same as excusing behavior. If the author wanted him to be framed as purely arrogant and sinful, he would’ve written him that way. Instead, he’s written as emotionally underdeveloped and tragically obsessive. Ignoring that nuance doesn’t make the moral stance stronger— it just makes the reading narrower.

The author isn’t writing a morality tale where one is pure victim and one is pure villain. The story is literally about two characters whose flaws keep colliding over and over because neither of them has matured properly, and how love + biology + social hierarchy + pheromone conditioning creates a messy moral gray zones.

Author’s ambassador much!?