Wow u guys can cancel this but not rape?? I mean this manhwa was not good but can we bash ...

the setting used here inherently involves rape.

And how can we be sure of that?

Because Chattel slaves were raped? Do you assume racism is just black people in the fields 24/7 or Native's being exploited?

Gosh, can you take a hint? Reread the only chapter. Focus on the theme and setting that revolves the story.

any history books discussing enslaved people in the americas; but if you’re looking to start somewhere small look up “the origin of american gynecology” and that will give u just a small glimpse.

The story is set during a civil war, where violence, exploitation, and human rights abuses are unfortunately common. But saying the setting inherently means a specific act occurred is an assumption unless the story explicitly shows or states it. My point is that criticism should be based on what's actually portrayed in the work, and the same standards should be applied to other manhwa with similar themes."

When there's a dynamic between someone who is literally owned by someone else, aka a SLAVE, you have a an unbalanced power dynamic, which can easily be exploited by sexual coercion, or straight up rape. Not even to mention the historical lack of laws protecting slaves against said actions.

If you're holding hope in a time piece like this that it 'won't happen' or 'the mc will prove he's not like that', you're already under the assumption the MC will fall under the same White Savior Complex that's already romantized under these types of time period stories. Which is a major problem, whether you want to put that on the same level as SA or not is your prerogative.

It sounds like you've already decided what kind of story this is before letting it tell its story. If every work set in a historical period with slavery is automatically assumed to be promoting abuse or a white savior narrative, then you're judging the premise rather than the execution.

I'm not, I was actually going to give the story a shot, despite my personal dislike for the set up, but we're talking about the the historical context of how things actually were back then. But let's be real, the way they were setting up the main character in the one chapter we had was "oh this white boy isn't like other land owners, he doesn't even want slaves fr"

And no, I do know there are post-civil war stories that don't revolve around interracial couples, let alone "white saviour" but unfortunately a lot that do play into that troupe. You can't blame people, especially people who STILL LIVE with repercussions of this time period to be comfortable with the setting and not have critiques about it. We know the history, and to use that knowledge of what has happened, it's not strange to make assumptions anyway.

But its not like we'll ever know now so.

If your argument is that an imbalanced power dynamic is inherently problematic, then wouldn't that apply to a huge number of historical manhwa as well? History is full of class differences, wealth differences, social status differences, and employer-employee relationships. You can't really separate history from power imbalances.

For example, there are plenty of stories where a wealthy noble, CEO, boss, or employer falls in love with someone who works for them. One person has money, influence, status, and authority, while the other doesn't. That's also an unequal power dynamic. Yet most readers don't automatically assume coercion is happening or condemn the relationship from the start. Many people actually enjoy those stories.

My point isn't that all power imbalances are healthy. My point is that an unequal dynamic alone doesn't prove coercion, abuse, or romanticization. The way the relationship is written matters. If a story actually portrays coercion, then criticize it. But assuming it will happen simply because a power imbalance exists feels inconsistent when people don't apply the same standard to other stories with unequal relationships.

No I don't think so. The setting is dark for sure but that doesn't mean this will all eventually lead to rape. Its was all upon the author on what they were going to do with the characters.

Yes power dynamics are inherently problematic for different reasons in real life situations, but the level is wholly dependent on what kind. You can't equate a CEO/worker to a Master/Slave tho

Other than like.. the obvious legal risk you make to dating your boss, you are still two (hopefully) consenting adults. If we're being honest though, since you want to look manhwa stories specifically, there's a lot of contextual situations that still lead to rape in these stories BECAUSE of the power dynamic.

That is to say, even post-civil war, slaves were not considered people. And when they were they were considered to be not even half of a person. The power dynamic comes from entitlement of bodily autonomy, which in turn, can quickly turn into an issue when sex comes into play.

But honestly, it seems you want to argue solely on the dynamic of the relationship rather than the nuance that's added when you have to place that relationship in a specific time period. I get it. MC could have been a green-flag top or whatever, and most fujos who read BL are only there for the romance, but there are still plenty of people who consume media wholly, and clearly there is a wide set of people in the audience who feel some type of way about ignoring context to enjoy it

I think you're proving my point, though. You've spent most of this discussion explaining why the setting makes abuse possible, not why this specific story is guilty of it.

Nobody is denying that slavery is a far worse power imbalance than a boss-worker relationship. The question is whether the mere existence of that power imbalance automatically tells us how the story handles it.

You keep bringing up what slaves were historically considered and how these situations could lead to abuse. I agree. But "could" and "does" are not the same thing.

And if context matters, then all of the context should matter not just the historical setting. How the characters act, how the relationship develops, how the story frames the institution, and whether the narrative condemns or glorifies it all matter too.

What I'm seeing is people looking at the premise and deciding what the story's message is before examining the actual execution. Being cautious because of the setting is understandable. Treating that caution as proof is where I disagree.